Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

War on woke

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 14th Feb 2024, 11:54
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Station 42
Age: 69
Posts: 1,081
Received 91 Likes on 37 Posts
Originally Posted by TURIN
And there it is. The hate personified in one post, the very reason why the armed forces (and every other old school tie institution) needs to implement change.
Millions died in the trenches during WW1 because old people thought they knew better. That went well.
Thread drift, I know, but the 1914 assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a student in his early '20s triggered the First World War.

Last edited by stevef; 14th Feb 2024 at 12:25.
stevef is online now  
The following 2 users liked this post by stevef:
Old 14th Feb 2024, 12:41
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
Originally Posted by TURIN
And there it is. The hate personified in one post, the very reason why the armed forces (and every other old school tie institution) needs to implement change.
Millions died in the trenches during WW1 because old people thought they knew better. That went well.
If my own 20 year old is anything to go by I'm confident we're in safe hands. If yours are as bad as you say, that's on you. The problems of today are not the fault of this generation.
Surely it is not hate? It is judgemental, yes, a bit OTT, yes, but hate is very different.
As a published military historian I do find your explanation of the causes of the Great War very much at odds with the evidence.
langleybaston is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th Feb 2024, 13:35
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bucks
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by bugged on the right
Advertising on television seems to suggest that servicemen and women jolly around the world handing out sacks of rice, rescuing children from floods and being nice. They must get a big shock when they discover that their job is to intimidate their governments enemies and kill them. I think out savaging the savages and it's a very good leader who can turn that on or off.
No they don't get a shock, in my experience, as they tend to know know exactly what they're joining to do. The adverts are aimed more at the 'gate-keepers'.
Rheinstorff is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 13:45
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bucks
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I think if you're going to ask someone to put their life on the line, their opinion matters.

My experience is those 20 year olds to whom you refer (at least those who were RAF Regiment officers and gunners) make exceptionally good fighters and many of them are a much better fit than previous generations for modern warfighting with all its current complexity. They're no less willing to go in harm's way than their predecessors and, from what I've seen, would prefer to be doing that and earning the medals that go with it than lurking on Tik Tok, PPrune, or whatever.
Rheinstorff is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 13:50
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 220
Received 178 Likes on 68 Posts
Rheinstorff, what are the gatekeepers? Do you mean parents? Please explain.
bugged on the right is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 13:58
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bucks
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by bugged on the right
Rheinstorff, what are the gatekeepers? Do you mean parents? Please explain.
It's recruiter language, which I don't pretend to fully understand, but typically it refers to the parents or other people with significant influence over potential recruits' career choices, eg, teachers or lecturers.
Rheinstorff is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 14:07
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 220
Received 178 Likes on 68 Posts
There is the difference in a nutshell. When I joined up it was my decision. As I was under aged when I applied, I was obliged to get parental permission but my enlistment was entirely my decision and responsibility. Today the cult of the influencer means that other people are responsible it seems.
bugged on the right is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 14:18
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 1,203
Received 117 Likes on 53 Posts
Originally Posted by bugged on the right
There is the difference in a nutshell. When I joined up it was my decision. As I was under aged when I applied, I was obliged to get parental permission but my enlistment was entirely my decision and responsibility. Today the cult of the influencer means that other people are responsible it seems.
You're kind of proving the value of convincing the gatekeepers that joining the UKAFs is a good idea here though.

Your "gatekeepers" (and mine) agreed that joining was a good choice and therefore gave permission. If they thought the armed forces was a bad option they may not have. Equally if someone is on the fence and choose to seek advice from someone they respect (parent, community leader, religious propaganda pusher, teacher) we want them to encourage people to join up as well. If they all say joining up is a sh1t idea, it isn't going to help people decide what to do is it?
downsizer is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 14:29
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 220
Received 178 Likes on 68 Posts
The difference, downsizer is that armed forces recruitment was aimed at individuals, not their parents, friends, families or teachers. Have a look at the ad for the Australian Navy in the 80s. The theme was " you'll be wet you'll be homesick and frightened, but the pride of the fleet will be you. ". It's on the tube. They were booked solid for years.
bugged on the right is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 15:00
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 1,203
Received 117 Likes on 53 Posts
I don't think the adverts are aimed at gatekeepers of communities per se, but if there is a benefit then great.

When I took a posting into recruiting one of the first things that I was told on the course is that the adverts that you liked as an 18 year old, aren't going to be the adverts that 18 year olds like today, 25 years later! And its true, they weren't trying to recruit me, I was already 20 odd years deep by that point.
downsizer is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 15:35
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 220
Received 178 Likes on 68 Posts
Absolutely not downsizer. Imagine being promised you'll be wet, homesick and frightened today. Bullying, no duty of care. Appealing to toxic masculinity. Challenging, but reassuring that people are valued. Different kind of kids these days.
bugged on the right is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 15:42
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly in my own imagination
Posts: 477
Received 311 Likes on 145 Posts
Originally Posted by vascodegama
To have a role related fitness test (assuming it is a valid test) that is gender fair is indirect discrimination (against men) and illegal.
I don't really see why. If you look at thngs objectively, standards have always been set at an arbitrary level so that most men can pass them. How is that not discrimination? The fact that the average man can probably lift more weight than the average woman is not a valid reason to rig the game


Sue Vêtements is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 15:48
  #73 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 350/3 Compton
Age: 76
Posts: 790
Received 378 Likes on 95 Posts
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever
I suggest that all the signatories of the above letter give a copy to random 20 year olds ask them what they think. I don’t think they are going to like the answer. All of these people had their time in the service, I think they need to let go. In any case here is a thought experiment. Would they want their children to experience what they experienced when they joined the military. Not what it is now but what it was when they were 18,19 year old recruits, because that is essentially what they are asking for.
Well, BP, I for one would love my grandchildren to experience what a I did when I joined Dartmouth straight from school in 1966. The camaraderie and esprit de corps was exceptional, we had an aim and elders to help us achieve it and life was hard but very good. (Standfast the odd punishment run down to Sandquay and back!)

And yes, we had a course mate who was of Caribbean extraction but his ethnicity was never even mentioned - he was just Geoff, another makie-learnie pilot, getting on with the business of his chosen profession. The only trouble that we ever had was from the local lads, whose girlfriends were always keen to come to the Summer Ball!

The gentlemen who signed that letter have all had successful careers leading men and women of all ethnicities in some very difficult circumstances and are in a very good position to see what is happening to our services today. What we need now is warriors who can be inspired to achieve great things in dire circumstances. War does not discriminate, nor should we - but we need the very best recruits we can get, not those we need to “fill a quota”.


Mog
Mogwi is online now  
The following 3 users liked this post by Mogwi:
Old 14th Feb 2024, 16:25
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
Originally Posted by Sue Vêtements
I don't really see why. If you look at thngs objectively, standards have always been set at an arbitrary level so that most men can pass them. How is that not discrimination? The fact that the average man can probably lift more weight than the average woman is not a valid reason to rig the game
Wrong. My granddaughter Rockape struggled with the massive deadlft block of concrete. Reason for pass/fail test?
Ability to lift/move a body, dead or alive, willing or unwilling. A weight a fair number men (me) could not tackle. Defined task, pass/fail, zero discrimination, zero latitude for error.
exactly what women want, equality.
Simples.
langleybaston is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 16:43
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Received 21 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Sue Vêtements
I don't really see why. If you look at thngs objectively, standards have always been set at an arbitrary level so that most men can pass them. How is that not discrimination? The fact that the average man can probably lift more weight than the average woman is not a valid reason to rig the game
Ask Hampshire Police! They had a gender fair test for dog handlers and fell foul of exactly that. In essence a male candidate passed the female standard but failed the male one . The tribunal ruled he was a victim of discrimination. Actually I was wrong in my post it is direct discrimination. The important point was that the role orientated test was a legitimate means to an end.
vascodegama is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 16:43
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Alles Über
Posts: 377
Received 42 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by Mogwi
Well, BP, I for one would love my grandchildren to experience what a I did when I joined Dartmouth straight from school in 1966. The camaraderie and esprit de corps was exceptional

Mog
Speaking personally from my experiences and observations, the offer of camaraderie and espirit de corps is not what it once was, perhaps even as little as 10/15 years ago.
The proliferation of single man rooms. Everyone owning a car, therefore ghost camps at weekends/block leave. Exercises having very little flex built into them for AT/boozing.
I'd say the only chance you have of getting the old experience is if you are posted abroad/on ship or tour these days.
trim it out is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 17:38
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly in my own imagination
Posts: 477
Received 311 Likes on 145 Posts
It's funny reading the comments from old people regarding the current 20 year olds. It's as if the generation that preceeded the oldies didn't say the same things about them
Sue Vêtements is offline  
The following 4 users liked this post by Sue Vêtements:
Old 14th Feb 2024, 17:42
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
Originally Posted by Mogwi
Well, BP, I for one would love my grandchildren to experience what a I did when I joined Dartmouth straight from school in 1966. The camaraderie and esprit de corps was exceptional, we had an aim and elders to help us achieve it and life was hard but very good. (Standfast the odd punishment run down to Sandquay and back!)

And yes, we had a course mate who was of Caribbean extraction but his ethnicity was never even mentioned - he was just Geoff, another makie-learnie pilot, getting on with the business of his chosen profession. The only trouble that we ever had was from the local lads, whose girlfriends were always keen to come to the Summer Ball!

The gentlemen who signed that letter have all had successful careers leading men and women of all ethnicities in some very difficult circumstances and are in a very good position to see what is happening to our services today. What we need now is warriors who can be inspired to achieve great things in dire circumstances. War does not discriminate, nor should we - but we need the very best recruits we can get, not those we need to “fill a quota”.


Mog
And we need to pay the rate [Rate?] for the job: handsomely. Very many military roles are more demanding than driving a train. QED.
langleybaston is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th Feb 2024, 17:44
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,285
Received 712 Likes on 250 Posts
Originally Posted by Sue Vêtements
It's funny reading the comments from old people regarding the current 20 year olds. It's as if the generation that preceeded the oldies didn't say the same things about them
Prove it please. With examples and sources.
langleybaston is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 19:17
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly in my own imagination
Posts: 477
Received 311 Likes on 145 Posts
Originally Posted by langleybaston
Prove it please. With examples and sources.
Look I'm not trying to pick a fight, but I think it's pretty well known that every generation says this about the next generation. They even make country songs about it

and seeing as you asked, here are some quotes:

​​​​​The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise,
Young people are high-minded because they have not yet been humbled by life, nor have they experienced the force of circumstances. They think they know everything, and are always quite sure about it.
The beardless youth… does not foresee what is useful, squandering his money
​​​​​​​Our sires’ age was worse than our grandsires’. We, their sons, are more worthless than they; so in our turn we shall give the world a progeny yet more corrupt
​​​​​​​Youth were never more sawcie, yea never more savagely saucie . . . the ancient are scorned, the honourable are contemned, the magistrate is not dreaded.
You can find more and the attributions here



Having said that, I doubt that this current young generation will be able to insult their replacements anywhere near as well as we and our forefathers did ​​​​​​​
Sue Vêtements is offline  
The following 8 users liked this post by Sue Vêtements:


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.