Posted on Dec 8, 2017
Fighting Against the Movies: Not Everyone Pulls Triggers
69.4K
688
200
161
161
0
Recently, I have found myself having long conversations with civilians about the military. I am a full time student at a private university in Kansas and much of the faculty and student body has never even thought about joining the military. It isn’t anything strange; this is to be expected at such a small school and the fact that the military makes up less than 1% of the population of the country. What is interesting is that many of them have only the movies to go off of when forming their view of what everyone does in the military. Sadly, making movies about productive supply sergeants and personnel clerks doesn’t really make people line up outside of the theaters. Many civilians, in my experience, have this idea in their head that every single member of the military is out on the battlefield, kicking in doors and getting shot at or blown up. Those of us who have spent any amount of time in the military knows that this is far from the reality of the military. Perhaps this is where recruiting takes the biggest hit.
I spoke to a professor of mine who is going through a point in her life where she is trying to make a transition from her current position to a new one. As she was looking through openings at different universities across the country to put in a packet for the position, I made a joke about how she should just go and commission in the Air Force or something. Don’t get me wrong, I loved being in the Army, but I also know the kind of people that would be able to be successful in the Army and she is far more suited for the Air Force. She actually took the comment seriously. The money as an officer is more than she is making now. The opportunity for advancement is obviously there. The only real concern that she had was that she didn’t want to find herself in Iraq or Afghanistan in a year, getting shot at and blown up. I couldn’t help but to laugh.
I began to explain how the military is made up of many occupations that have almost nothing to do with direct combat. This was new information for her. As I began to name off occupations like public affairs, logistics, intelligence, and clerical her eyes went wide. I tried to break it down in the easiest way that I could by telling her that you can think of the military as a microcosm for the country. We know that the military makes up less than 1% of the population in the United States and in almost an exact, similar fashion, those who work as combat arms occupations (such as infantry, tankers, and cavalry) make up about 1% of the military. I went on to break down the military into the three categories that we all know and love: combat, combat-support, and support. I finished up by explaining that, if she chose a certain occupation, the chances of her being involved in direct combat were slim to none. I will follow that statement up by saying that I did tell her that there is always the possibility and that there are still non-combat service members that are injured or killed in combat.
This entire conversation made me wonder if this woman’s view of the military, where everyone is running around with fully automatic rifles, night vision goggles, going in under the cover of night and wrecking shop, is really what the rest of the country thinks is all that is done. They don’t know what goes on behind the scenes; they don’t know what goes into conducting a single mission long before the first HMMWV rolls out of the FOB. After this thought, I began to wonder if this is why many people don’t give military service a single thought.
Next, I wondered if this same idea is why we have so many guys, or gals, who leave the military honorably after serving in a support role and decide to go out and say that they were Delta Force Seal Special Ranger Snipers or whatever the kids are saying these days. Are all of the recent military movies that glorify only that small percentage to blame for these issues? When we really begin to think about it, if combat arms is such a small population within our military, just how small is the population that works as a member of these special groups? It is tiny.
I do not know what the remedy for this issue is. I do not think that there should be a ban on military movies glorifying heroism and bravery under fire, even if I do find that many of the movies are awful. What is there that can be done though? Is there any way that we can properly educate citizens on what makes up the military? How can we also get it through the minds of our people that get out after serving that there is no need to act like something that you were not?
The military takes all kinds. It is a giant machine that requires numerous moving parts. If one part fails, every cog in the machine grinds to a halt or, at a minimum, does not function nearly as well as it needs to.
I spoke to a professor of mine who is going through a point in her life where she is trying to make a transition from her current position to a new one. As she was looking through openings at different universities across the country to put in a packet for the position, I made a joke about how she should just go and commission in the Air Force or something. Don’t get me wrong, I loved being in the Army, but I also know the kind of people that would be able to be successful in the Army and she is far more suited for the Air Force. She actually took the comment seriously. The money as an officer is more than she is making now. The opportunity for advancement is obviously there. The only real concern that she had was that she didn’t want to find herself in Iraq or Afghanistan in a year, getting shot at and blown up. I couldn’t help but to laugh.
I began to explain how the military is made up of many occupations that have almost nothing to do with direct combat. This was new information for her. As I began to name off occupations like public affairs, logistics, intelligence, and clerical her eyes went wide. I tried to break it down in the easiest way that I could by telling her that you can think of the military as a microcosm for the country. We know that the military makes up less than 1% of the population in the United States and in almost an exact, similar fashion, those who work as combat arms occupations (such as infantry, tankers, and cavalry) make up about 1% of the military. I went on to break down the military into the three categories that we all know and love: combat, combat-support, and support. I finished up by explaining that, if she chose a certain occupation, the chances of her being involved in direct combat were slim to none. I will follow that statement up by saying that I did tell her that there is always the possibility and that there are still non-combat service members that are injured or killed in combat.
This entire conversation made me wonder if this woman’s view of the military, where everyone is running around with fully automatic rifles, night vision goggles, going in under the cover of night and wrecking shop, is really what the rest of the country thinks is all that is done. They don’t know what goes on behind the scenes; they don’t know what goes into conducting a single mission long before the first HMMWV rolls out of the FOB. After this thought, I began to wonder if this is why many people don’t give military service a single thought.
Next, I wondered if this same idea is why we have so many guys, or gals, who leave the military honorably after serving in a support role and decide to go out and say that they were Delta Force Seal Special Ranger Snipers or whatever the kids are saying these days. Are all of the recent military movies that glorify only that small percentage to blame for these issues? When we really begin to think about it, if combat arms is such a small population within our military, just how small is the population that works as a member of these special groups? It is tiny.
I do not know what the remedy for this issue is. I do not think that there should be a ban on military movies glorifying heroism and bravery under fire, even if I do find that many of the movies are awful. What is there that can be done though? Is there any way that we can properly educate citizens on what makes up the military? How can we also get it through the minds of our people that get out after serving that there is no need to act like something that you were not?
The military takes all kinds. It is a giant machine that requires numerous moving parts. If one part fails, every cog in the machine grinds to a halt or, at a minimum, does not function nearly as well as it needs to.
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 89
Maybe someone needs to make a documentary about it and put it on the Discovery Channel or PBS or something.
(2)
(0)
We dealt with this in recruiting. All the proof sources in the World can't overcome a serious objection to serve. Misconceptions and drawbacks are easier. If a kid asked if he would stand guard, mess, or any other duty, the answer was yes. If they understood that enlistment equaled a blank check up to and including their life, you left little for the imagination. That's when you showed a picture of headstones at Arlington, and if they could find a better way to serve, go for it. Intangibles only mean a lot to certain groups of people. Many in academia become jaded over time, to confirm their bias against serving. Not all. Some had illustrious records of service, but never spoke of it.
(1)
(0)
I didn't read this last year when it was posted but enjoyed it immensely -
You captured the flag on this one. Thanks.
You captured the flag on this one. Thanks.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
I heard somewhere once that the ratio of support personnel to actual door kicker is 8:1 even in a BCT. Think of all the supply, logistics, maintenance, admin and medical folks it takes to support the actual person on the ground sending rounds downrange. It's staggering.
SGT Joseph Gunderson
I would even go out on a limb to say that the ratio is far heavier on the support side. At a minimum, if using conventional war as the sample, there are multiple times more support personnel than combat personnel (i.e. people intended to engage the enemy). There are entire Support Brigades composed of nothing but these individuals. To my knowledge, there is not a single unit that is composed of all combat SMs that is larger than possibly a PLT sized element. The military is like a clock: all you see are the two - possibly three - hands moving but there is plenty going on behind the face of that clock to ensure that everything runs as smoothly as possibly.
(0)
(0)
This myth that many of us joined because we couldn’t succeed in the civilian sector was also perpetuated by people already serving. I remember going to the board for SGT, and the CSM looking over my 201 file. He looked up at me and asked,”What, you couldn’t find a real job?” I still almost 30 years later remember my surprise. I also remember my response, “SMG, if you look more closely, you will notice that I graduate 5 years ago. Up until recently I had been employed by the Hyatt Corporation as the Executive Chef.” At that point he said ,”Good answer. I have no further questions for the candidate.” It also surprises people today when I tell them that I was very successful before I joined the Military. Obviously I was substantially older than my peer group, and as such had a little more maturity than most of the other Sp4’s. In my personal opinion, it’s a whole lot easier to succeed in the civilian sector than the Army. Anyone who leaves the Military, and applies themselves to a civilian job the way they did in the Military, there is no way that they will not succeed. Surprisingly, while recently taking a college course, I was able to identify other veterans, not only by their thought out replies, but also for the most part, more refined vocabulary. The work ethic one develops in the Military, which most bring in with them, is just honed by their service. Just my $.02 cents.
(1)
(0)
Most liberals feel that old wardogs like us are stupid. That we joined because we were too stupid to do anything else. I love to play with people like that by asking them things like "what is a mobius strip"? or a Klien's bottle. Or a tesaract. That last one they know, but are floored when they find out it's actually NOT what they saw in the movies.Most can't even tell you what Einstein's theory of relativity is actually about.
(1)
(0)
Your experience in describing the military to your transitioning college professor is illuminating. My grandfather, father, and sister, are all college professors with Ph.D. degrees. But, my father and sister's perception of the military was interesting. I feel that many veterans would help the general perception of military service, but it is hard to have conversations where the civilians start teaching you what they know from watching the news, etc... I finally told some civilians that prior to retirement the Army removed the red telephone I had where the President would call and ask for advice.
(1)
(0)
In my opinion where the problem lies is the Military members them selves. "yeah I'm ex army" Or "well yes I was a marine" This is just the way they say it. Be Proud " I was in the ARMY". While in or even when they get out they (not all) tend to not talk about the time they were in, SGT Gunderson you can make a difference of what civilians view us as. You are a writer so now I ask have you ever heard of Bob Kern? He is a writer as well, "WE WERE SOLDIERS TOO" is one of his best series of books actually its the only series I have read so far. It is actually a gathering of short story's from Soldiers who served in the cold war. He has several other series. No one wants to hear the boring well I served in a boarder camp in Germany for three years, we patrolled the board looking for people who may have crossed the board to get to freedom and to make sure the people on the other side were not going to attack. BORING!
The movies are make believe and Best sellers have to have Hero's AMERICA Needs Hero's. Most want to be seen as the most important Soldiers. A perfect example of that is WWII and VIETNAM. I am a Vietnam Vet. as defined by the US ARMY, Veterans Admin. and Google with that said things have change see I was not a COMBAT VET. So to be by the new politically correct I must change my title to Vietnam Era Vet. Soldiers from WWII Were all defined as Vets. But now your only a vet if you went to Sand Land with a combat unit. How ever to even further dignify things Retired is no longer the same as my time in the Military now you have Retired Soldiers with 6 years or so of Service. This has caused people like me to keep quiet about their service so as to avoid condescending questions, Oh you weren't Combat? No but I spent 20+ years you only spent 3. It is easier to say I served and leave it at that. JMO
The movies are make believe and Best sellers have to have Hero's AMERICA Needs Hero's. Most want to be seen as the most important Soldiers. A perfect example of that is WWII and VIETNAM. I am a Vietnam Vet. as defined by the US ARMY, Veterans Admin. and Google with that said things have change see I was not a COMBAT VET. So to be by the new politically correct I must change my title to Vietnam Era Vet. Soldiers from WWII Were all defined as Vets. But now your only a vet if you went to Sand Land with a combat unit. How ever to even further dignify things Retired is no longer the same as my time in the Military now you have Retired Soldiers with 6 years or so of Service. This has caused people like me to keep quiet about their service so as to avoid condescending questions, Oh you weren't Combat? No but I spent 20+ years you only spent 3. It is easier to say I served and leave it at that. JMO
(1)
(0)
SGT Stephen Jaffe
I was in a four year enlistment with the Army Security Agency from Feb. 1965 - Nov. 1968. I spent two years in Japan and almost a year in Vietnam. Sometimes people ask me if I fought in 'Nam. I tell them I served in Vietnam, but I can't say I fought in 'Nam. I suppose my MOS 72B (comm center operations) was the way the Army wanted me to fight. We were subjected to rocket and mortar attacks. We were sometimes subjected to small arms fire from people you could not see. If you served 'in country', you were subject to dying at anytime.
(1)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
Your and awesome person Sgt. Jaffe and a Vet. By any standard. We were not (including you) allowed to Pic what we done or where we did it. Soldiers all and wanted to be proud of it but it was a time in life when that was not possible. Now after serving during the Vietnam era, cold war on the boarder (No one cared) and even serving during desert storm. and seen 30 days in a combat zone. Not long enough to be called a combat vet but we all served we put our selves in a position to come home in a box. My DD 214 says Vet that's all I need to know. Thank you for your service Sgt. Jaffe.
(0)
(0)
As a veteran who taught physics for years, I had to tell my students every year that I was a Nuke, not a SEAL team member. I had to explain the differences.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

Command Post
Entertainment
Movies
Military service
SGT
