Friday, January 28, 2005
Colin: So when are we moving?
Kip: I have no idea.
Colin: Any rumors?
Kip: The only rumor I know of is the one I started.
Graffiti: ’One weekend a month’, my ass!
Colin: [nodding to the newly arrived replacement Soldier] Harold, have you met the new guy?
Harold: I was his RA at ESU. I got him in the Guard. I ****ed him good, huh? I said, ‘Come to drill, it’s fun!’”
Marty: Remember at Dix when they told us that walking in the snow was just like walking in the sand?
SGT: [briefing our relief on our sector] There’s a Gurkha in that tower, so don’t waste him.
Colin: [After ranting about Kip being taken advantage of and then trying to preempt his patent response] And don’t say, “It’s all good,” because it’s not.
Kip: It’s all tolerable.
Soldier: [sincerely] To be honest with you, I don’t like Arabs.
Colin: I’m getting fat.
Reed: Colin, I love you anyway. You’re like the inbred half stepchild I never wanted.
Iraqi man in car at road block: Thank you for not shooting me.
Clean: [referring to Kip giving unwanted carepackage items to the Colonel (Iraqi Army, Retired) ] Kip is taking away from American Soldiers and giving to the Hajjis.
Colin: [appealing to Clean's God fearing side] What does Jesus think about that?
Kip: Jesus was a hajji.
Colin: Yes, I guess he was in the way we use the word. We could say Jesus was a rag head. Adam and Eve were definitely rag heads.
Clean: And see how they ****ed up the world?
Kip: He paid a Hajji to install the door. He got jew’d so bad!
Colin: Jew’d by a Hajji?
Colin: So, Sleepy, looking back on the deployment, what’s the biggest thing you’ve learned?
Sleepy: Don’t volunteer for anything.
Kip: [in reference to the rigorous NCO at the Post Office] You gotta be careful about the female E6 there.
Colin: The one that looks like a crack whore?
Kip: Yep.
Colin: [reading an article] The DOD urinalysis test can find THC in your urine for three weeks after you've smoked a joint.
Soldier: That’s why cocaine is the way to go.
Platoon SGT: Are you going to put those on somebody’s bed?
Colin: [caught holding a box of feminine hygiene products] I was going to, SGT.
Platoon SGT: OK, just checking.
Clean: [briefing us] … and just know that if they need your blood, they will take it.
Bud: Uh oh, don’t tell Judge that.
Clean: [trying to assure me] Oh, of course, the blood will be going to another Soldier.
Colin: ***k the Soldier, I want my blood to go to a Hajji.
Colin: [wondering why Clean didn’t come right out and say we were getting a break from our leader] So, is it a secret that Phil is going on the advance?
Clean: No, I said it like that so people would have to think about it for even just a little while, in order to avoid a spontaneous outburst.
Kip: I have no idea.
Colin: Any rumors?
Kip: The only rumor I know of is the one I started.
Graffiti: ’One weekend a month’, my ass!
Colin: [nodding to the newly arrived replacement Soldier] Harold, have you met the new guy?
Harold: I was his RA at ESU. I got him in the Guard. I ****ed him good, huh? I said, ‘Come to drill, it’s fun!’”
Marty: Remember at Dix when they told us that walking in the snow was just like walking in the sand?
SGT: [briefing our relief on our sector] There’s a Gurkha in that tower, so don’t waste him.
Colin: [After ranting about Kip being taken advantage of and then trying to preempt his patent response] And don’t say, “It’s all good,” because it’s not.
Kip: It’s all tolerable.
Soldier: [sincerely] To be honest with you, I don’t like Arabs.
Colin: I’m getting fat.
Reed: Colin, I love you anyway. You’re like the inbred half stepchild I never wanted.
Iraqi man in car at road block: Thank you for not shooting me.
Clean: [referring to Kip giving unwanted carepackage items to the Colonel (Iraqi Army, Retired) ] Kip is taking away from American Soldiers and giving to the Hajjis.
Colin: [appealing to Clean's God fearing side] What does Jesus think about that?
Kip: Jesus was a hajji.
Colin: Yes, I guess he was in the way we use the word. We could say Jesus was a rag head. Adam and Eve were definitely rag heads.
Clean: And see how they ****ed up the world?
Kip: He paid a Hajji to install the door. He got jew’d so bad!
Colin: Jew’d by a Hajji?
Colin: So, Sleepy, looking back on the deployment, what’s the biggest thing you’ve learned?
Sleepy: Don’t volunteer for anything.
Kip: [in reference to the rigorous NCO at the Post Office] You gotta be careful about the female E6 there.
Colin: The one that looks like a crack whore?
Kip: Yep.
Colin: [reading an article] The DOD urinalysis test can find THC in your urine for three weeks after you've smoked a joint.
Soldier: That’s why cocaine is the way to go.
Platoon SGT: Are you going to put those on somebody’s bed?
Colin: [caught holding a box of feminine hygiene products] I was going to, SGT.
Platoon SGT: OK, just checking.
Clean: [briefing us] … and just know that if they need your blood, they will take it.
Bud: Uh oh, don’t tell Judge that.
Clean: [trying to assure me] Oh, of course, the blood will be going to another Soldier.
Colin: ***k the Soldier, I want my blood to go to a Hajji.
Colin: [wondering why Clean didn’t come right out and say we were getting a break from our leader] So, is it a secret that Phil is going on the advance?
Clean: No, I said it like that so people would have to think about it for even just a little while, in order to avoid a spontaneous outburst.
Kip with the Colonel. The Colonel spent six months in an Iraqi jail after the first Gulf War.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
I’ve been Sick for a Few Days
So I haven’t been able to write much. But I will be writing on my disappointing experience with this FOB’s medical care – after all those nice things I said about military medicine...? I’m still too crabby to write something objective. Meanwhile, here are some Armed Forces Radio Public Service Announcements I found amusing:
You remember ET? “ET pho-o-o-one ho-o-o-ome” He was a smart little bugger because he knew how important it is to keep in touch with loved ones. You need to phone home, especially during the holidays…
___
…your urine should be clear. If your urine is yellow, you are dehydrated. So, drink more water and pee your way clear to good health - hey that’s what the card says.
___
It is 1145 just about lunch time, and speaking of lunch, it’s important to wash your hands before every meal.
___
OK, and we are going to have an educational commercial thingy. Let’s see what are we learning about today?: the differences between the Sunnis and the Shiites – WOO HOO!
So I haven’t been able to write much. But I will be writing on my disappointing experience with this FOB’s medical care – after all those nice things I said about military medicine...? I’m still too crabby to write something objective. Meanwhile, here are some Armed Forces Radio Public Service Announcements I found amusing:
You remember ET? “ET pho-o-o-one ho-o-o-ome” He was a smart little bugger because he knew how important it is to keep in touch with loved ones. You need to phone home, especially during the holidays…
___
…your urine should be clear. If your urine is yellow, you are dehydrated. So, drink more water and pee your way clear to good health - hey that’s what the card says.
___
It is 1145 just about lunch time, and speaking of lunch, it’s important to wash your hands before every meal.
___
OK, and we are going to have an educational commercial thingy. Let’s see what are we learning about today?: the differences between the Sunnis and the Shiites – WOO HOO!
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
I am still anticipating [an] entry about Rummy and "the army you've got"
The administration, with the backing of congress, asked the Department of Defense to go to war against the regime in Iraq and it did so with the Army it had. I don't think it would have been reasonable for the Pentagon to say that they didn’t have enough up armored humvees to go to war. Even so, based on the intelligence we had - and it was flawed – there was little reason to think that we’d be involved in a guerilla war in which up armored vehicles have become so important.
Since 9/11, I’ve read many of the transcripts of Secretary Rumsfeld’s press conferences and interviews and I think he’s doing a good job. He has been pretty consistent on an approach once policy comes down from the White House. As I mentioned before, I think we’ve tried to finesse too much, but that’s what happens when politics is involved.
The administration, with the backing of congress, asked the Department of Defense to go to war against the regime in Iraq and it did so with the Army it had. I don't think it would have been reasonable for the Pentagon to say that they didn’t have enough up armored humvees to go to war. Even so, based on the intelligence we had - and it was flawed – there was little reason to think that we’d be involved in a guerilla war in which up armored vehicles have become so important.
Since 9/11, I’ve read many of the transcripts of Secretary Rumsfeld’s press conferences and interviews and I think he’s doing a good job. He has been pretty consistent on an approach once policy comes down from the White House. As I mentioned before, I think we’ve tried to finesse too much, but that’s what happens when politics is involved.
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Redeployment
The Commander sent a letter to our families. It read in part:
“I now anticipate that Ghost Company will return home sometime in late [sometime] based on guidance available through battalion. I do not have an exact date, and even if I did, I would not be able to reveal it for security reasons. (I caution all, however, that extensions are always possible, and we must be cognizant that this could happen). We will move from Iraq to Kuwait before returning to Fort Dix. We will go through a five to ten day de-mobilization process. The actual process only takes three to four days, but with so many units departing and arriving the process could be delayed. The de-mobilization process is extremely important to your soldier's future since it deals with medical issues, awards, evaluations, retirement points, and other issues that need to be in order before returning from active duty. I ask that you stay away from Fort Dix during this short de-mobilization period. My hope is that the soldiers can remain focused on the above issues. I know this will be difficult since we are so close, and you have not seen your loved one in many months; however, a mistake on our part at the de-mobilization site could delay release.”
The Commander added that packages should not be sent after 15JAN2005 and letters and cards should not be sent and 01FEB2005.
The Commander’s advice to families must have come down from above; on two separate visits, the Commander said to us in regards to de-mobilizing at Ft. Dix, “I don’t care what you do, I’ll be locked in my room, just let me know if the building catches fire.” Now, we can’t have our families visit? Is this the way to approach it?
The letter implies that families could show up at any time and the Soldier would be excused from whatever he is currently doing with a frown from his supervisor. This isn’t how the Army –even today’s Army - works. Soldiers have to be accountable for their whereabouts at all times. Failure to be at our assigned place of duty on time is a crime.
As one Soldier put it, “Were’ grown men. It’s not like our parents showed up to our kindergarten class [and we] keep looking back at mommy and smiling.”
The Commander sent a letter to our families. It read in part:
“I now anticipate that Ghost Company will return home sometime in late [sometime] based on guidance available through battalion. I do not have an exact date, and even if I did, I would not be able to reveal it for security reasons. (I caution all, however, that extensions are always possible, and we must be cognizant that this could happen). We will move from Iraq to Kuwait before returning to Fort Dix. We will go through a five to ten day de-mobilization process. The actual process only takes three to four days, but with so many units departing and arriving the process could be delayed. The de-mobilization process is extremely important to your soldier's future since it deals with medical issues, awards, evaluations, retirement points, and other issues that need to be in order before returning from active duty. I ask that you stay away from Fort Dix during this short de-mobilization period. My hope is that the soldiers can remain focused on the above issues. I know this will be difficult since we are so close, and you have not seen your loved one in many months; however, a mistake on our part at the de-mobilization site could delay release.”
The Commander added that packages should not be sent after 15JAN2005 and letters and cards should not be sent and 01FEB2005.
The Commander’s advice to families must have come down from above; on two separate visits, the Commander said to us in regards to de-mobilizing at Ft. Dix, “I don’t care what you do, I’ll be locked in my room, just let me know if the building catches fire.” Now, we can’t have our families visit? Is this the way to approach it?
The letter implies that families could show up at any time and the Soldier would be excused from whatever he is currently doing with a frown from his supervisor. This isn’t how the Army –even today’s Army - works. Soldiers have to be accountable for their whereabouts at all times. Failure to be at our assigned place of duty on time is a crime.
As one Soldier put it, “Were’ grown men. It’s not like our parents showed up to our kindergarten class [and we] keep looking back at mommy and smiling.”
Friday, January 14, 2005
More on Last Month’s Rocket Attack
The Soldiers who were wounded were sitting in their room when the blast blew in the window. Some Soldiers lost a lot of personal and tactical gear and what wasn’t damaged in their rooms, was destroyed in their trucks. Our room had very little damage; the one next to us had its window shattered and several items, including a Play Station, destroyed. Ricky and Marty tried to put out the fire with extinguishers, but it was already too big. Impressively, the Army reimbursed Soldiers for all damaged personal items and equipment.
The company pulled together to help each other out, with the exception of our platoon’s second squad. They balked at taking our duty the next day so we could repair our rooms and help out with the general clean up. They said if they did take our watch, we’d owe them big time. A truck from another platoon helped out with no strings attached.
Reader Feedback
[It’s] interesting that you have to censor your own [CO]
Or similar
Did you really think OPSEC was followed or were you just making a … statement?
I really do think the Commander followed OPSEC. The name of our FOB is posted at the gate. The fire and secondary explosions could easily be seen from the surrounding area. We have dozens of Iraqis working on our base and many of them have seen the damage close up. It’s interesting that if there had been deaths or significant destruction, the story would have been in media, perhaps with pictures. Somehow, since it didn’t rate that attention, it’s a secret. If I were in charge, I’d put up a sign, “**** YOU! You Missed Us!”
There was a legitimate concern about the email: Were the families of those injured notified before the email was sent? Soldiers also complained that they were not allowed to mention the attack to their families, but the commander was. Well, it’s his prerogative.
I sanitized the memo because as an enlisted Soldier, I have to follow a stricter standard. An enlisted Soldier can get into trouble by following the examples of officers. To understand the differences between officers and enlisted Soldiers, let’s use the over simplistic, but time tested agrarian model. Enlisted Soldiers are like indentured servants working on a plantation. The officers are the gentlemen planters, and the NCOs are the overseers: “Wring your cap when the master speaks to thee!”
Indentured Servant: But the master said that I could have off Sunday.
Overseer: I don’t care what the master said. You work for me.
Let’s say an officer told his indentured servants that it’s OK to have a drink at the end of the day, but just don’t get carried away. Do you think that officer would be held accountable when alcohol is found? No, that servant will be flogged or otherwise physically punished.
In some ways, the system has kept up with the times: Instead of surveying his dominion with a Tennessee Walker, it’s now a Segway HT. When a rider approached me looking for directions, I didn’t even look up to see his rank: “Right this way, sir!”
Have you heard the term ‘Powdered Princes’? An analyst used this to describe US Army officers [who are] "Long on the Powerpoint but short on the leadership.
In old my infantry unit, no officers could be described like that. But after my armored unit’s annual training, I told the commander that he needed to let his officers know that the Guard is not a country club.
Officers get accused of glory hunting: “Take a picture of me helping the children” or always at the center of a fire fight. But the latter is more likely do to the fact they are they ranking Soldier in the area of operations (AO), and when something goes down, they don’t have to wait for an order to fire. Officers, like any manager, can have it tough. If he’s hands on, he’s a micromanager. If he’s hands off, he’s never around.
I was on KP when a Soldier complained that there was no syrup for his pancakes. He was emphatic about it, so I assumed he was an officer – I couldn’t tell for sure since he was in a PT uniform. It’s not that the complaint didn’t make sense or would have been unreasonable in civilian life. But the enlisted Soldier understands that this is the Army and officers don’t seem to keep that in mind. For Air Force or Navy enlisted this would still be a good question, but not in the Army.
We were waiting for our tardy senior NCO, when he finally got in the truck and said, “Sorry I’m late guys, I had to [blah blah blah - some lame excuse]”. I smiled and said, “No problem, sir!” To an NCO, that’s an insult.
The Soldiers who were wounded were sitting in their room when the blast blew in the window. Some Soldiers lost a lot of personal and tactical gear and what wasn’t damaged in their rooms, was destroyed in their trucks. Our room had very little damage; the one next to us had its window shattered and several items, including a Play Station, destroyed. Ricky and Marty tried to put out the fire with extinguishers, but it was already too big. Impressively, the Army reimbursed Soldiers for all damaged personal items and equipment.
The company pulled together to help each other out, with the exception of our platoon’s second squad. They balked at taking our duty the next day so we could repair our rooms and help out with the general clean up. They said if they did take our watch, we’d owe them big time. A truck from another platoon helped out with no strings attached.
Reader Feedback
[It’s] interesting that you have to censor your own [CO]
Or similar
Did you really think OPSEC was followed or were you just making a … statement?
I really do think the Commander followed OPSEC. The name of our FOB is posted at the gate. The fire and secondary explosions could easily be seen from the surrounding area. We have dozens of Iraqis working on our base and many of them have seen the damage close up. It’s interesting that if there had been deaths or significant destruction, the story would have been in media, perhaps with pictures. Somehow, since it didn’t rate that attention, it’s a secret. If I were in charge, I’d put up a sign, “**** YOU! You Missed Us!”
There was a legitimate concern about the email: Were the families of those injured notified before the email was sent? Soldiers also complained that they were not allowed to mention the attack to their families, but the commander was. Well, it’s his prerogative.
I sanitized the memo because as an enlisted Soldier, I have to follow a stricter standard. An enlisted Soldier can get into trouble by following the examples of officers. To understand the differences between officers and enlisted Soldiers, let’s use the over simplistic, but time tested agrarian model. Enlisted Soldiers are like indentured servants working on a plantation. The officers are the gentlemen planters, and the NCOs are the overseers: “Wring your cap when the master speaks to thee!”
Indentured Servant: But the master said that I could have off Sunday.
Overseer: I don’t care what the master said. You work for me.
Let’s say an officer told his indentured servants that it’s OK to have a drink at the end of the day, but just don’t get carried away. Do you think that officer would be held accountable when alcohol is found? No, that servant will be flogged or otherwise physically punished.
In some ways, the system has kept up with the times: Instead of surveying his dominion with a Tennessee Walker, it’s now a Segway HT. When a rider approached me looking for directions, I didn’t even look up to see his rank: “Right this way, sir!”
Have you heard the term ‘Powdered Princes’? An analyst used this to describe US Army officers [who are] "Long on the Powerpoint but short on the leadership.
In old my infantry unit, no officers could be described like that. But after my armored unit’s annual training, I told the commander that he needed to let his officers know that the Guard is not a country club.
Officers get accused of glory hunting: “Take a picture of me helping the children” or always at the center of a fire fight. But the latter is more likely do to the fact they are they ranking Soldier in the area of operations (AO), and when something goes down, they don’t have to wait for an order to fire. Officers, like any manager, can have it tough. If he’s hands on, he’s a micromanager. If he’s hands off, he’s never around.
I was on KP when a Soldier complained that there was no syrup for his pancakes. He was emphatic about it, so I assumed he was an officer – I couldn’t tell for sure since he was in a PT uniform. It’s not that the complaint didn’t make sense or would have been unreasonable in civilian life. But the enlisted Soldier understands that this is the Army and officers don’t seem to keep that in mind. For Air Force or Navy enlisted this would still be a good question, but not in the Army.
We were waiting for our tardy senior NCO, when he finally got in the truck and said, “Sorry I’m late guys, I had to [blah blah blah - some lame excuse]”. I smiled and said, “No problem, sir!” To an NCO, that’s an insult.
In this case these gentlemen are officers and doctors, so I can't fault them - it's innate.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
I found your comments on women in the military interesting. A little too diplomatic, though.
Yes, well I'm trying to avoid sensitivity training upon my return to civilization.
It also [provides for] potential sexual situations.
Yes, I didn't mention the sexual situations; we do have those here. We had a discussion about its effect on mission and morale and the general opinion is that as long as the Soldiers are not on the same mission or perhaps in the same unit, it shouldn't be a problem. Soldiers are prohibited from having intimate contact of any kind or being alone in a room with a person of the opposite sex. Our new XO said we'd go to jail for having sex, but that's either hype or for the penalty for the umpteenth offense, for it hasn’t stopped even those who have been caught.
Quote
Colin: Why are those jets flying like that?
Kip: Like what?
Colin: In tight circles around the I Zone at such a high elevation.
Clean: ‘Cause Hajji hates that sound.
Patriotic New Americans
I met a Soldier from Estonia today. She is a mental health specialist and gave us a briefing on stress. She was so well spoken and professional, I thought she might be doing graduate work. It turned out she and her husband won the US Green Card Lottery and she enlisted to be part of what she referred to as this great adventure.
I agree with the Pentagon’s and the Administration’s rhetoric on Old and New Europe. Though the terms may not be accurate, Eastern Europe loves their newly acquired freedom.
Yes, well I'm trying to avoid sensitivity training upon my return to civilization.
It also [provides for] potential sexual situations.
Yes, I didn't mention the sexual situations; we do have those here. We had a discussion about its effect on mission and morale and the general opinion is that as long as the Soldiers are not on the same mission or perhaps in the same unit, it shouldn't be a problem. Soldiers are prohibited from having intimate contact of any kind or being alone in a room with a person of the opposite sex. Our new XO said we'd go to jail for having sex, but that's either hype or for the penalty for the umpteenth offense, for it hasn’t stopped even those who have been caught.
Quote
Colin: Why are those jets flying like that?
Kip: Like what?
Colin: In tight circles around the I Zone at such a high elevation.
Clean: ‘Cause Hajji hates that sound.
Patriotic New Americans
I met a Soldier from Estonia today. She is a mental health specialist and gave us a briefing on stress. She was so well spoken and professional, I thought she might be doing graduate work. It turned out she and her husband won the US Green Card Lottery and she enlisted to be part of what she referred to as this great adventure.
I agree with the Pentagon’s and the Administration’s rhetoric on Old and New Europe. Though the terms may not be accurate, Eastern Europe loves their newly acquired freedom.
Friday, January 07, 2005
What do [E5 and E6] mean? Do they have to do with a personnel member's MOS or grade? What's yours?
To describe someone's position, we usually use their pay grade, instead of their rank. I guess that's because it's easier and it applies across services. Secretary Rumsfeld uses this term to describe his own position when he’s asked a national policy question: “that’s above my pay grade” My grade is E4 and my rank is specialist.
To describe someone's position, we usually use their pay grade, instead of their rank. I guess that's because it's easier and it applies across services. Secretary Rumsfeld uses this term to describe his own position when he’s asked a national policy question: “that’s above my pay grade” My grade is E4 and my rank is specialist.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Cushy Staff Job
We set up a roadblock the other night and the cars were queuing up smartly when a pick up truck pull out of line and advanced toward the intersection. I raised my weapon, pointing it about ten feet in front of the vehicle. The truck then stopped and the driver got out. It didn’t take long to identify him as “friendly”.
Belligerent US Solider: Get that weapon off me!
Me: I don’t have my weapon on you, sir.
Belligerent US Solider: Well, you just about did. Next time you point a weapon at me, I’m going to take it away from you. You understand. I have to get chow to General so-and-so, a two star general. I know you are going to let me through.
Me: [having identified him as a staff sergeant] You’ll have to see my team leader, sergeant [pointing].
Belligerent US Solider: Where is he?
Me: [pointing more intently] He’s right over there, sergeant.
Belligerent US Solider: [walking over to my team leader and talking tough] Who’s in charge here?
In the end, the belligerent delivery guy - and the hungry two-star general - waited until we lifted the roadblock. Like in Dilbert, the ridiculous and sometimes black comedy in war movies is based on actual events. Speaking of roadblocks, guns, and food service, a reader had a question on the recent tire shooting:
Is this the first time you have shot at some one (while sober)?
Just because I worked at a combo Italian restaurant and red-neck-wanna-be sports bar – and, well, sometimes carried a gun – doesn’t mean I ever shot at anyone while unwinding after hours. I was shooting at dart boards with worn out corks. Hey, I had to be ready to pull the trigger and be on the target when I made those late night bank drops.
What is your stance on woman in combat? Worth it? Dangerous because they cannot be depended upon? Ineffective? Effective? Do you have personal experience of milops with females? What are your general impressions?
Women are excluded from “units whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground.” This includes infantry, artillery, armor, and combat engineers, as well as special forces. I have no reason to believe that females cannot be depended upon in combat. As an ideal, I think females should be allowed to have any job they can handle, as should males. To make this work, three issues need to be addressed: standards, facilities, and the way our society views males and female roles.
Historically, introducing women into jobs which have required strength and speed, such as fire fighter or police officer has resulted in an erosion of physical requirements for both sexes. Before the integration of women, I think men tended to exclude themselves from jobs they could not handle physically. But, in order to reconcile affirmative action with the fact that women can not perform - physically - at the same level as men, something had to give. Employers, mostly governmental, decided to lower physical standards or focus on them less.
When I first joined the military, I believe a strength test was only required for prospective Air Force munitions handlers who had to show that they could raise their share of a guided missile above their heads. But many military occupational specialties (MOS) require strength. In armor and artillery, rounds must be loaded into cannons. In infantry, heavy equipment, such as mortars, machine guns, and ammunition, must be carried on foot.
The Army gives an aptitude test, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), as part of its entrance process. Each MOS has a required ASVAB score, which serves as a predictor of a Soldier’s success in both their training and job performance. Though the body has a greater capacity for conditioning than the mind, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to use a physical fitness test during the entrance process to serve as a predictor of one’s physical performance.
There is one physical performance standard in the Army, the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The standards, which are different for males and females, are too low for the Army as a whole, but would serve well as a minimum for clerical workers. From there, the more physical a job becomes, the higher the standards should be. And with combat arms, the standards for both males and females should be the same.
The height and weight requirements should also be MOS specific. We have an MP who is about 56" tall. Can an MP of this size perform all of the duties required? We have Soldiers that can't charge the .50, so instead they mount the SAW. These smaller Soldiers happen to be females, but they could just as well be males. Vehicle crew members, however, don’t need to be big people. It would be advantageous for them to be on the smaller side. I'm just over the 73” maximum height for a tanker, and it's cramped in there. We should put the small people in the vehicles and put the large people on the ground. Why try to accommodate big people in tanks, helicopters, and fighters? Because it’s a prestigious job and their daddy went to The Academy? Theoretically, smaller people mean smaller vehicles with lower profiles and lower costs.
In basic training, we had males and females together, on the same floor. And since we didn’t have doors on our rooms, we all had to change clothes in our respective latrines. That’s 24 Soldiers all trying to get dressed in five minutes in a facility which wasn’t built for that purpose. At medic school, there was one lavatory for our classroom. Since there were more males than females in the class, the instructors determined that the males would utilize the facilities during our ten minute break and the females would get to use it during the lat ten minutes of class time. That certainly wasn’t fair to them.
In a deployed area, is it worth it to build and maintain two sets of facilities? In Southern Baghdad, there were two latrines on our floor; one for the 120 males, and one for the 15 females. Was this reasonable or was there an undue burden placed on the unit as a whole? Where we are now, males and females share a latrine. Would the majority of Americans be comfortable sharing the restroom at work with the opposite sex? If not, is this something we should ask our military personnel to do? And with a ten to one male to female ratio, is it OK to leave the seat up?
People who believe that sexual orientation is determined genetically shouldn’t find it hard to accept that males and females have evolved into specialized roles. And though Joseph the kindergartner suggests it’s as simple as "Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina," there's more to it. The physiological stuff may be better described in “In Defense of the Caveman” than “Mars and Venus”, but I think it is instinctive for males to protect females. It is certainly a deeply rooted cultural belief which is constantly reinforced in our society.
A female and I went on an early morning, chow run together. It was dark and no one else was on the road. Maybe I’ve watched too many movies, but I said to myself that I would die before I let anything happen to her. As trivial as it was, this made me less focused on the mission. In the Gulf War, tight lipped male POWs started talking when the Iraqis started sexually assaulting female POWs. Is this surprising?
I think that women should be allowed in all female artillery and armor units and continue to be excluded from combat engineer, infantry, and special forces units. Perhaps some look to the day we enter a brave new world where beautiful young Star Ship Troopers of both sexes fight, die, and shower together, but I think it will be an unwelcome change that’s a long way off.
We set up a roadblock the other night and the cars were queuing up smartly when a pick up truck pull out of line and advanced toward the intersection. I raised my weapon, pointing it about ten feet in front of the vehicle. The truck then stopped and the driver got out. It didn’t take long to identify him as “friendly”.
Belligerent US Solider: Get that weapon off me!
Me: I don’t have my weapon on you, sir.
Belligerent US Solider: Well, you just about did. Next time you point a weapon at me, I’m going to take it away from you. You understand. I have to get chow to General so-and-so, a two star general. I know you are going to let me through.
Me: [having identified him as a staff sergeant] You’ll have to see my team leader, sergeant [pointing].
Belligerent US Solider: Where is he?
Me: [pointing more intently] He’s right over there, sergeant.
Belligerent US Solider: [walking over to my team leader and talking tough] Who’s in charge here?
In the end, the belligerent delivery guy - and the hungry two-star general - waited until we lifted the roadblock. Like in Dilbert, the ridiculous and sometimes black comedy in war movies is based on actual events. Speaking of roadblocks, guns, and food service, a reader had a question on the recent tire shooting:
Is this the first time you have shot at some one (while sober)?
Just because I worked at a combo Italian restaurant and red-neck-wanna-be sports bar – and, well, sometimes carried a gun – doesn’t mean I ever shot at anyone while unwinding after hours. I was shooting at dart boards with worn out corks. Hey, I had to be ready to pull the trigger and be on the target when I made those late night bank drops.
What is your stance on woman in combat? Worth it? Dangerous because they cannot be depended upon? Ineffective? Effective? Do you have personal experience of milops with females? What are your general impressions?
Women are excluded from “units whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground.” This includes infantry, artillery, armor, and combat engineers, as well as special forces. I have no reason to believe that females cannot be depended upon in combat. As an ideal, I think females should be allowed to have any job they can handle, as should males. To make this work, three issues need to be addressed: standards, facilities, and the way our society views males and female roles.
Historically, introducing women into jobs which have required strength and speed, such as fire fighter or police officer has resulted in an erosion of physical requirements for both sexes. Before the integration of women, I think men tended to exclude themselves from jobs they could not handle physically. But, in order to reconcile affirmative action with the fact that women can not perform - physically - at the same level as men, something had to give. Employers, mostly governmental, decided to lower physical standards or focus on them less.
When I first joined the military, I believe a strength test was only required for prospective Air Force munitions handlers who had to show that they could raise their share of a guided missile above their heads. But many military occupational specialties (MOS) require strength. In armor and artillery, rounds must be loaded into cannons. In infantry, heavy equipment, such as mortars, machine guns, and ammunition, must be carried on foot.
The Army gives an aptitude test, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), as part of its entrance process. Each MOS has a required ASVAB score, which serves as a predictor of a Soldier’s success in both their training and job performance. Though the body has a greater capacity for conditioning than the mind, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to use a physical fitness test during the entrance process to serve as a predictor of one’s physical performance.
There is one physical performance standard in the Army, the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The standards, which are different for males and females, are too low for the Army as a whole, but would serve well as a minimum for clerical workers. From there, the more physical a job becomes, the higher the standards should be. And with combat arms, the standards for both males and females should be the same.
The height and weight requirements should also be MOS specific. We have an MP who is about 56" tall. Can an MP of this size perform all of the duties required? We have Soldiers that can't charge the .50, so instead they mount the SAW. These smaller Soldiers happen to be females, but they could just as well be males. Vehicle crew members, however, don’t need to be big people. It would be advantageous for them to be on the smaller side. I'm just over the 73” maximum height for a tanker, and it's cramped in there. We should put the small people in the vehicles and put the large people on the ground. Why try to accommodate big people in tanks, helicopters, and fighters? Because it’s a prestigious job and their daddy went to The Academy? Theoretically, smaller people mean smaller vehicles with lower profiles and lower costs.
In basic training, we had males and females together, on the same floor. And since we didn’t have doors on our rooms, we all had to change clothes in our respective latrines. That’s 24 Soldiers all trying to get dressed in five minutes in a facility which wasn’t built for that purpose. At medic school, there was one lavatory for our classroom. Since there were more males than females in the class, the instructors determined that the males would utilize the facilities during our ten minute break and the females would get to use it during the lat ten minutes of class time. That certainly wasn’t fair to them.
In a deployed area, is it worth it to build and maintain two sets of facilities? In Southern Baghdad, there were two latrines on our floor; one for the 120 males, and one for the 15 females. Was this reasonable or was there an undue burden placed on the unit as a whole? Where we are now, males and females share a latrine. Would the majority of Americans be comfortable sharing the restroom at work with the opposite sex? If not, is this something we should ask our military personnel to do? And with a ten to one male to female ratio, is it OK to leave the seat up?
People who believe that sexual orientation is determined genetically shouldn’t find it hard to accept that males and females have evolved into specialized roles. And though Joseph the kindergartner suggests it’s as simple as "Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina," there's more to it. The physiological stuff may be better described in “In Defense of the Caveman” than “Mars and Venus”, but I think it is instinctive for males to protect females. It is certainly a deeply rooted cultural belief which is constantly reinforced in our society.
A female and I went on an early morning, chow run together. It was dark and no one else was on the road. Maybe I’ve watched too many movies, but I said to myself that I would die before I let anything happen to her. As trivial as it was, this made me less focused on the mission. In the Gulf War, tight lipped male POWs started talking when the Iraqis started sexually assaulting female POWs. Is this surprising?
I think that women should be allowed in all female artillery and armor units and continue to be excluded from combat engineer, infantry, and special forces units. Perhaps some look to the day we enter a brave new world where beautiful young Star Ship Troopers of both sexes fight, die, and shower together, but I think it will be an unwelcome change that’s a long way off.
Sunday, January 02, 2005
News Article Quoting Bud on the New Year's Holiday
“It's work today, work tomorrow. We're here to work," said Bud ... a military policeman from [someplace]. "Iraqis don't celebrate our holidays, so we can't put the war on holiday.”
Colin: This [article] makes Bud out to be anti Iraqi.
Kip: He is.
“It's work today, work tomorrow. We're here to work," said Bud ... a military policeman from [someplace]. "Iraqis don't celebrate our holidays, so we can't put the war on holiday.”
Colin: This [article] makes Bud out to be anti Iraqi.
Kip: He is.
