Okay, you have a very legitimate gripe.
I can’t speak to the Pre-John Lehman era of the 80’s.
I have a few questions.
What time period were you in boot camp?
Did you attempt to follow it up? This was a very unlawful act.
Were you 18 and afraid that follwing it up would make things worse for you?
If so this is a legitimate problem with boot camp, almost an organize Hyper Peer Pressure approach. I have always stood up for myself and even friends but it is hard to do so in boot camp. The pressure is there to not make waves. I guess I was a barracks lawyer. I would have got your DI busted if it was me, but again I understand that I was not normal or average. My worse thing in bootcamp never compared to what you described and I did not witness such an act of brutality. It makes me sad that you underwent it without the DI getting punished.
Considering that we have been deploying troops in active combat in the middle east sing September, 2001, a better statistic would be the number of Marines who have had a Afghan or Iraq tour versus the total population of Marines, including those who have mustered out since 2002.
Yes, I know. But the problem is, there’s still no reason why the army shouldn’t be in charge of all infantry. In this day and age, if we are having the saem debates that we had during WWI, then we are IDIOTS. Organizing major battles today is so radically different, and the various needs and abilities of soldiers so much more specialized, that the marines doesn’t seem to make sense as a distinctly separate entity. If not them, then why not all sorts of other specialities? Yeah, I get it: they are “different.” I’m sure they get told that a million times. You sound like you are just repeating things that were drilled into you, sorry. But that’s the past. The question is: what’s the most effective form for the future?
Well as far as things drilled into me… one of my advanced degrees (as mentioned previously) is History (masters of art)… I’ve also ‘been there’… and ‘done that’… (been in 3 combat areas, been IN combat… been there with Army infantry and USMC grunts)… I would like to think I might have some personal expirence, as well as knowledge of the past… to draw on…
The Marines operate off Navy ships… they are basically the Navy’s Army… that envirment alone, requires specalized methodologies… they are also more moble then the Army (in general)… and prepare differently…
The saying that the Marines are the 911 force is pretty apt… they are the first responders… the ones that go into the hotspots… the ones that put out the house fires… it takes different attitudes than a forest fire fighter…
Without understanding the differences in the groups… it would be difficult to help you understand just how much more we need the different groups now… than before…
BUT as example… the Army, Navy, AirForce, and Marines all have planes… should all planes fall under the Airforce? If so it complicates things to a point of near standstill… not to mention you would have to cross train them so much with the groups they actually work with that they would ‘conform’ more to that group than their parent organization…
I’m not for pulling out. I’m just not into this pathetic “its the American public’s fault for Vietnam” thing. It won’t be true in Iraq either. The responsibility for how this turns out rests squarely on the head of the people who planned and executed things, who were told what things to avoid and then they went ahead and screwed the pooch anyway. I’ve advocated interventionism in small facist states indepedent of security concerns for quite some time. I just don’t want it done incompetantly.
It does if you’re pouring time and effort and money into a screwup, when that time and effort and money could be better spent on other things. In Iran, for instance, we have a REAL security threat now. We have real life genocides in Darfur. Never again! Oh wait, no, never again… unless the Leaders say to pay more attention this, over here!
1988, or thereabouts, & my DI cautioned me not to. He did not order me not to pursue it, nor threaten me. But he made it plain that things would not go well for me.
Well, no. We’re trying to advise Samclem’s kid about the future, not the past. Almost all predictions are that troops strength in Iraq will be significantly lower within a year.
Excuse me for oversimplifying. The point still stands. IF the American public believed that liberation, and democratization were of themselves enough reason to commit to combat, then politicians would have done all they could to keep resources pouring into Vietnam. That overwelming support did not exist. It doesn’t exist now. In fact, I dont believe that view point has ever existed. If it had, then we would have “rushed in to East Timor and Darfur and Rwanda…” We don’t rush into those places because the American public does not believe that Americans should die for other people. I never said it had anything to do with “hippies”.
Yea, because South Korea got where they are with no economical help from us in the last few decades. Right? Had we won, we would have also aided them economically. Not just through loans, but better trade oppurtunities. It would not have been quickly eradicated, but it would have gradually improved. At a MUCH faster rate than their seeing now. If you can even call what their doing now as “improving”.
I went through US Army Basic Combat Training in 1979. It was made very clear to me by my Drill Sergeants, Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor, that an act such as you described is unlawful.
Is there a better way to spend money than helping those that NEED help…
We might have ‘screwed the pooch’ as far as going into Iraq (though at the time no one knew it…), we might have even made major mistakes afterward (again it is easy to see somethings in hindsight… and for every person who comes forward to say ‘i told them not to do that’ you can find someone who said ‘do that’…)… the question of what happened in the past is no longer important for staying in Iraq… the question is what to do now…
Should we pull out? If so what will happen to the Iraqi people?
IMHO… too late now… we need to stay and help… we have been there for ~1000 days… we were in Japan for 10 years… things ARE moving forward (governmentally)…
According to intelligence we now have… but then we had intel on Iraq too…
Frankly we don’t know much more about Iran than we did Iraq… both countries said ‘we aren’t doing anything with weapons’… both times we said ‘yeah sure’…
Actually, then, I think we agree for the most part. I just haven’t given up on Iraq yet. Maybe that’s because I can’t give up. As long as we keep at it, there’s always a chance for success.
Same was true in the early 90’s… that DI would have been reassigned that day…
NOW sure people cover stuff up… AND there was plenty of ‘shit’ to go around when I was in bootcamp… but nothing like that… frankly if a DI can’t make you torture yourself (without needing the extra help of glass, punches, etc) then he isn’t very good at what he does…
Samclem, you might want to buy your son a copy of Making the Corps, by Thomas E. Ricks. It follows a group of recruits through the 11 weeks of basic training at Parris Island.
That is a good movie for anyone intersted in the Marines… and it is an pretty honest film… that said… like childbirth…there are somethings you have to go through to fully understand…
Huh? You’re talking about a rising economic powerhouse. Pardon me for not getting a more recent link, but the Asian Development Bank had many positive things to say about the Vietnamese economy.
I’d say they’re doing pretty well for themselves. Would they be as well off if the South had prevailed? We’ll never know. But it certainly wasn’t the end of the world that the North won. Americans tend to think that democracy is for everyone and it’s our sacred duty to fight and die for it all over the world. That just isn’t so.
Communism and Democracy are not mutually exclusive… though every example of Communism we have had to this point has also been a dictatorship to one degree or another… and we tend to tie the type of government to the type of economic system… but they are different things…
Frankly we don’t even want Democracy… we want Democratic Republics… that is a society where the people have a say in what goes on; and elect their leaders… I’m not aware of ANY group that would rather be governed by a single ruler (be it monarchy, dictatorship, or single party system), that they have no say in…
Some pracitcal advice if he DOES decide to join up…
Make sure he can run 3 miles in less than 24 minutes… do 5 dead hang pullups (go to a recruiter so they can show you what a ‘real’ dead hang is)… and beable to do 70 crunches (again have the recruiter show you what is acceptable) in less than 2 minutes…
I would consider that the minimum level of fitness required to START USMC bootcamp (though it is above the offical minimums… if you are any less fit than this, you will have MAJOR issues that you CAN avoid, prior to joining)
I’m not at all surprised. I went to Army boot in the fall of '76. I watched a DS force a trainee with funkmouth to brush his teeth with a wire brush and scouring powder. At least he had the decency to order the poor slob not to swallow the bleach. The kid was a stereotypical momma’s boy and was out of sight and mind the next day. I always wondered if the kid ever ended up in the hospital or the stockade.
One morning in formation, me and one of my buddies got caught snickering at something and were forced to stand toe to toe with a 55 gallon can resting on our heads while we sounded off “Ha-ha-ha ha-ha-ha” in cadence. My buddy was about 6’2" and his head ended up taking the brunt of the weight. When he tried to bend his knees a little to even out the weight distribution, the DS would whack the side of the can and ordered him/us back to the position of attention. This went on for what seemed like an eternity, it was hot and full of our CO2, but was probably only about ten minutes. My goofing off in formation days were over. I could go on for pages discribing the abuse I saw 30 years ago in basic traning.
Back then, the Army was in the business of weeding out the ones that had trouble dealing with non-combat stress, its thinking being that if you can’t handle being physically and mentally abused, you sure as hell can’t handle battle. Whether or not that philosophy was correct or not, it was the practice of the times.
Today, the pussification of basic training is leaving us with soldiers who don’t fear for their lives for the first time until they’re in combat. That’s not the best time to find out what you’re made of.
As far as going to boot camp, what EEMan said. It’s better and easier to show up already lean.
But that was NEVER the reason we were there in the first place. What went wrong in Vietnam was that a communist regime was facing off against what many of the local people saw as an equally nasty post-colonial regime, and we offerred the people little more than the idea that they were in the way, and that we didn’t much care whether or not they liked the SV rulers any better than the NV. For us, it was a pawn in a game against the Soviets under a theory of falling dominoes and regional influence, not an end in itself. The book The Ugly American, while utterly fantastical, described a lot of the problems we faced and caused. And we lost the struggle for Vietnam IN VIETNAM, not at home.
What I think is ill-advised is not democracy promotion, or even democracy promotion via military force, but when democracy promotion becomes the public-cover for operations that never started or ended with that ethic being the motivating operating principle. It was a rationale rooted around for after the fact to help sell what was ultimately realpolitik. In Iraq, countless people wanted to be involved with the idea of turning Iraq into a democracy, with all sorts of input and lessons learned from past examples. Most of those people got shut out, their advice and plans scrapped.
Worse, when this administration got around to selling democracy in Iraq to the American public as a rationale, it never really got behind describing to anyone what would be actually be needed. The American people weren’t sold anything about an indefinate military engagement in Iraq. The difference between what was presented to them and what actually happened (predictably happened) isn’t something that can be brushed aside as simply the American populace going all weak on Iraq. The mission and vision of what the engagement involves has shifted all over the place, often without any sort of honest acknowledgement of what’s going on: oftentimes with outright denials of reality. But anyone with a brain back long before the invasion knew that secretarian civil war would be a huge huge obstacle to peace and democracy, and that making it happen would take extreme amounts of time, men, and money from the US. That wasn’t what the American people were sold on, and it looks as if that wasn’t even what the administration even planned for. It was all hooked on after the fact.