Posted on Apr 8, 2018
A1C Ian Williams
6.5K
43
40
10
10
0
I'm an adult and most people reading this are adults as well. However, when it comes to those incendiary topics, we might be better off steering clear. I don't believe you should have to suppress your opinion but I do believe that we on Rally Point waste too much energy promoting those divisive topics that we know push each other's buttons.

I will leave you with this thought. Though we may disagree and bicker, I know among most of my true friends on here, we depend on each other and would never truly wish to cause each other discomfort.
Edited 8 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 16
1SG Civil Affairs Specialist
3
3
0
D0a949c3
So, a few thoughts.
There are those on here that just love the controversial subjects. They post them not so much to validate their positions or invalidate those who disagree, but rather to roll the grenade into the room and watch the chaos ensue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... well, you will just have to score your internet points from someone else.
Having said that, a forum like this is a golden opportunity for thoughtful people to have cogent positions debated out. Often, we find a point of view we might not have thought of otherwise.
I have seen excellent discussions about gun regulation and DACA in recent months, and fondly remember some good ones on BLM and during the election season.
Just because a subject is controversial shouldn't mean it is off limits. And I would further say that blocking people just because they disagree is unhealthy. The abusive types, sure. But they are fairly few and not all that hard to identify.
If you are thin-skinned, you are in the wrong place. But respectfulness and thoughtfulness in disagreement go a long way.

So don't feed the trolls, and debate on, RP.
(3)
Comment
(0)
A1C Ian Williams
A1C Ian Williams
8 y
I will always support, open and honest debate that stays relevant to the topic with the focus solely on the issue. 1SG (Join to see) By the way V, and my wager...
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Phyllis Maynard
3
3
0
A1C Ian Williams I started avoiding divisive topics when I realized I was always being baited into endless arguments by the same people who had no intention of respecting my belief or me. I blocked them to ensure they could not chime in to me. I want to enjoy RP, express myself respectfully, and be among comrades without duress or stress.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
SPC Erich Guenther
8 y
PO3 Phyllis Maynard - I only been called a name once or twice but it was someone from Active Duty or Reserves. Didn't bother me, she was lacking in life experience by about 30 years compared to me. So I suspect she will feel regret around age 45-47....not holding my breath on it. Seriously though I don't let the negative comments get to me. I do think the USAF people on RP are overly sensitive on Religious Topics and sometimes Political topics. We discussed both while in uniform just not publicly but I remember platoon CP discussions way more rougher than anything I have seen on RP. I suspect Army and Marines are more frank in their discussions while in uniform. What gets me is the people that block me AND then comment openly on my threads. As the above author has done. Completely unknown why I was blocked in the first place because I never got public notice or a PM AND I don't ever remember attacking him or calling him a name. I suspect it was a religious discussion I had he did not agree with or was offended with. Who knows and really I don't care. Fact is though if he is sensitive to what his chain of command thinks...........which does not surprise me at E-3. Should the rest if us tip toe around the land mines or even try and guess what they are? I have no clue what is taboo to discuss in public if I m in the USAF because I never have been in the USAF. I have noticed the religious topics bother them unless they go a specific direction. Was never the case in the Army or National Guard. So thats why I think some of this is service branch differences.
(1)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Phyllis Maynard
PO3 Phyllis Maynard
8 y
SPC Erich Guenther my experience has been closely similar to yours. Yes, mostly religion. My feeling is and I have asked those who don't believe as I to simply not engage my conversation because it is not for them. But, it is evident they wanted to bully me so I started blocking them so they could not comment on my profile thread. Those who block you, simply go to their profile and block them then you won't have to suffer one sided abuse.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
SPC Erich Guenther
8 y
PO3 Phyllis Maynard - Ahhh, that narrows it down. OK so I actually am a firm believer in God but at times I see the perspective of agnostics and those that criticize my religion due to past and current abuses..........which I have little control over but I feel I have to listen to the grevances vs turning my back. Militant Athiests on a recruiting mission......eh, forget it. I don't have to listen to that crap but sometimes I try to make sense of it, only to feel later I wasted my time completely. Thanks for the tip on the profile.
(1)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Phyllis Maynard
PO3 Phyllis Maynard
8 y
SPC Erich Guenther I feel your stress DE-STRESSING :0)
It feels good to put a jerk on 32 degrees below freezing :0)
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LCDR Sales & Proposals Manager Gas Turbine Products
2
2
0
There are those who simply like to start trouble, and those who passionately believe in things they want to defend intellectually. The former are fairly easy to avoid...the latter have taught me a great deal over the years.

I used to sincerely believe that "politics" had no place in a military person's life...to some degree, I've come to regard that as an overly simplified position. The more developed sense is likely one where "debate" does not detract from the commitment, but rather enhances one's understanding of it.

For my own part, I am thankful for a forum where the "entry criteria" is somewhat a level playing field. Most of us on RP have some commonality, and I think that offers a clear path to bridging some "gaps" between various ideologies, beliefs and principles.

I'd like to think that when "we" find compromise, agreement, or even the ability to "agree to disagree"...it offers some hope for the rest of the population in achieving the same.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
Should we worry about those who try to start fights on Rally Point?
Susan Foster
2
2
0
Everyone should be able to disagree without being disagreeable. Thanks for the reminder.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
SPC Erich Guenther
8 y
I think the answer depends on your service background. Generally Marines and Army speak frankly and to the point. Thats the culture of those two service branches. I actually think that is part of the issue here.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Susan Foster
Susan Foster
8 y
A1C Ian Williams - Well said.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Susan Foster
Susan Foster
8 y
SPC Erich Guenther - Having worked with the military so many years, I agree. In fact, when I went to a civilian agency, they thought I spoke too directly. I get it!
(0)
Reply
(0)
1SG(P) Dean Mcbride (MPER) (SPHR)
1SG(P) Dean Mcbride (MPER) (SPHR)
1 y
When I went to work for Texaco (after retirement and five years in college), my boss reminded me a few times that "I was not in the Army anymore!". I had to forget my First Sergeant mentality....
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG John Millan
1
1
0
Unfortunately, if someone is Marxist, woke, non-warrior, CRT, DEI, tranny, BLM, ANTIFA or making disloyal posts; violating the UCMJ, they aren’t troops, friends or colleagues; and certainly are not brothers or sisters. Treason is the lowest form of misconduct for a troop. RP sadly is a somewhat left-leaning site by some (not all) of its administrators, who threaten any person who likes democracy, a warrior mindset and America, but they are deafeningly silent on treasonous or UCMJ violation type posts. I have been threatened 2x for being rude, but an openly-Marxist service member, a SR NCO who has made it clear she hates the USA and democracy and has openly made threatening, rude, factually-wrong and treasonous statements, has been overlooked, cheered on and encouraged by some RP administrators. That now-retired Sr. NCO made criminal posts for tears and could be recalled, discharged and lose retirement, or lose a stripe for not serving satisfactorily during the time those posts were made. That individual is also under scrutiny by congressional staffers now. The enforcement of rules on here is very arbitrary, biased and ideological. Some of those same Marxist administrators on here are retired military and their actions are also now being monitored by a Republican congressional staffer as UCMJ violations, for potential recall to active duty and potential dismissal, after Jan 20. A lot of these folks, retired senior officers, don’t realize they are subject to the UCMJ for life as retirees and their red flag waving criminal actions on here are violations of the UCMJ; DOD online regs-a lawful order, conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and making disloyal statements. An active Lt. Col. and a retired Lt. Col. on here are openly Marxist. The congressional staffer making a list of offenders and logging screen shots of criminal posts, to give to JAG, OIG, CID, OSI, NCIS and CGIS, along with the new SECDEF and service secretaries was speechless. He's retired military and asked how this site got so bad. Not my place to say was my response. It’s gonna be a purge soon. Career traitors will face loss if pension and VA benefits, dismissal or OTH discharge. They may face UCMJ action after Jan 20. While his Ali’s a privately maintained site and the Marxist slant is 1st Amendment-protected, service members’ 1st Anendnent rights are constrained. Opinions are one thing, but openly being a traitor is another, so this site could be flagged as extremism and off limits for those personnel subject to the UCMJ if the treasonous activities, illegal posts, radicalism and toxic ideology continues. I warned an administrator and he doubled down. I even had a monitor tell me UCMJ violations aren’t crimes! The UCMJ is federal law, codified by congress and signed into la by the Prez! This level of gross lack of knowledge by senior retired officers is appalling! This site is great for me to give and take good info and interact with fellow vets and retirees but sadly, it’s sometimes the go-to site for vets, reserve component and active or retired service members to brazenly violate the UCMJ. It’s gonna change after Jan 20th, voluntarily or involuntarily. The date of the marches, non-warrior, tranny, racist, soft military are ending.
(1)
Comment
(0)
1SG(P) Dean Mcbride (MPER) (SPHR)
1SG(P) Dean Mcbride (MPER) (SPHR)
1 y
1SG John Millan You hit upon a subject that many retirees are not aware of!

The UCMJ normally does not apply to veterans. Specifically, veterans cannot be court-martialed if they were discharged from active duty before they reached 20 years of service or retired from the reserves and aren’t entitled to retirement pay until age 60. However, the following two groups of retirees are treated like active-duty members and can be charged under the UCMJ:

Active-duty veterans who retired from the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Space Force, or Coast Guard and are entitled to immediate retirement pay
Navy-Marine Corps Fleet Reservists (those who retired from the Navy or Marine Corps between 20 and 30 years of service)

Because certain military retirees continue to receive a sort of “retainer pay,” and Fleet Reserve members can be called back to service at any time, government prosecutors argue they are subject to the UCMJ. Prosecutors also say court-martial power is necessary because it gives the government authority to prosecute any who refuse to return to service.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CMSgt Mark Schubert
1
1
0
Worry about them? No - ignore them, yes.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Nathan G.
1
1
0
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC David Willis
1
1
0
Who is more foolish? The fool or the fool who follows him? People don't always need to take the bait, but for some reason we all love to do so.
(1)
Comment
(0)
A1C Ian Williams
A1C Ian Williams
8 y
The fool who follows him because he is deluded enough to believe he is too smart to fall for such an obvious baited trap SPC David Willis
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Bill Frazer
1
1
0
What to remember is _discuss- not brow beat, belittle or name calling. State facts behind the opinion you are giving- disagreeing should not start fights!
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Special Operations Response Team (Sort)
1
1
0
Hey I resent your comment... let’s create a scuttlebut about it. Lol

I understand your point but in my opinion one thing America needs is honest plain talk. We need to be respectful but absolutely willing to address the uncomfortable difficult contentious topics because those are often the most pressing issues of the day. We must be willing to struggle with these topics, embrace the discomfort, be respectfully and seek understanding, change and progress. We should be part of a solution, not sheep and not the problem.
(1)
Comment
(0)
LTC Special Operations Response Team (Sort)
LTC (Join to see)
8 y
Agreed that we need to be careful. Not because the truth is different or needs moderation but because sensitive snowflakes melt when the heat of a real debate ignites. But this is the flame of reason and freedom. Back in the day congress was a place of yelling ranting and dramatic debates. That’s ok. Let it happen and dont Aurora’s Free speech.
(0)
Reply
(0)
A1C Ian Williams
A1C Ian Williams
8 y
Very well said, sir LTC (Join to see)
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Special Operations Response Team (Sort)
LTC (Join to see)
8 y
Timing is everything. I won’t debate like this in uniform at work unless it is my assigned task which it rarely has been.
(0)
Reply
(0)
A1C Ian Williams
A1C Ian Williams
8 y
Yes, sir LTC (Join to see) You are also in a different position than perhaps I would be as an enlisted pre-commission. There is healthy debate about military operations and then there is a breakdown of communication that occurs when the focus is lost to an elevated temper. You give me some interesting perspectives as to what the level of tact should be as an officer. Thank you.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close