Posted on Oct 19, 2016
The Deliberate Emasculation of Our Armed Forces
36.6K
105
28
30
30
0
Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery once said, or rather warned, “We must be very careful what we do with British infantry. They are the people who do the hard fighting and the killing… Their fighting spirit is based largely on morale and regimental esprit de corps. On no account must anyone tamper with this.” Although we are not the British Army, this statement can allude to the current and deliberate destruction or emasculation of traditions, discipline, and morale that are the foundations of our Armed Forces, by misguided folks ranging from our Commander-in-Chief, certain high ranking officers in the Pentagon, the Senate, politicians and the mainstream media. First off, some people upon reading this will point out that attacking the C-in-C is taboo, and that is true - to a point. He is not a sacred cow and, to be perfectly honest, the rot which is slowly devouring the core values that we hold sacrosanct begins at the top, aided and abetted by politically-motivated senior military and naval officers and the aforementioned others.
It is very sad when veterans like myself and those who are actively serving look at social media sites and watch soldiers call out their own peers. These are NCOs and officers who don’t care about the welfare of their soldiers, discipline, or tradition because people are scared to enforce regulations due to political correctness. Political correctness has, in my opinion, turned the U.S. Armed Forces (especially the Army) into one vast petri dish open to absurd social experiments that will not help our warriors out in the battlefield.
When personnel have to go to social media in order to air their grievances, you have to wonder where the team leader is. Where is the squad leader? I am quite sure that some of the junior and senior NCOs are doing their jobs, but why are other senior NCOs and officers being reactive instead of proactive? We are all sick and tired of reading about the morale problems plaguing all five branches of the Armed Forces, commanders being sacked for not leading by example, not being politically compliant, etc. We are sick of hearing about junior enlisted whining about NCOs trying to discipline them, NCOs whining about not being able to do their jobs, and officers who don’t like their NCOs or Petty officers. The list goes on, and each day, our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen and Marines wind up suffering for the mess created by this disease that affects training, how they operate on the field, and so many other aspects of military life.
We need to have officers with collective intestinal fortitude to stand up to the C-in-C, their politicized fellow officers, spineless politicians and the mainstream media in order to fight for our traditions. Every service member in the U.S Armed Forces lives by these traditions and core values; they are the warrior ethos, the raison d’etre for all of us.
It is very sad when veterans like myself and those who are actively serving look at social media sites and watch soldiers call out their own peers. These are NCOs and officers who don’t care about the welfare of their soldiers, discipline, or tradition because people are scared to enforce regulations due to political correctness. Political correctness has, in my opinion, turned the U.S. Armed Forces (especially the Army) into one vast petri dish open to absurd social experiments that will not help our warriors out in the battlefield.
When personnel have to go to social media in order to air their grievances, you have to wonder where the team leader is. Where is the squad leader? I am quite sure that some of the junior and senior NCOs are doing their jobs, but why are other senior NCOs and officers being reactive instead of proactive? We are all sick and tired of reading about the morale problems plaguing all five branches of the Armed Forces, commanders being sacked for not leading by example, not being politically compliant, etc. We are sick of hearing about junior enlisted whining about NCOs trying to discipline them, NCOs whining about not being able to do their jobs, and officers who don’t like their NCOs or Petty officers. The list goes on, and each day, our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen and Marines wind up suffering for the mess created by this disease that affects training, how they operate on the field, and so many other aspects of military life.
We need to have officers with collective intestinal fortitude to stand up to the C-in-C, their politicized fellow officers, spineless politicians and the mainstream media in order to fight for our traditions. Every service member in the U.S Armed Forces lives by these traditions and core values; they are the warrior ethos, the raison d’etre for all of us.
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 19
Why I chose to leave the Army and pursue my own business venture.
I describe my reasons for deciding to set off on my own and pursue a happier life where I control my own success, and failures.
So maybe I can help the discussion along a little bit here. Attached is a video from a recently discharged Infantry SSG. I have heard complaints like this from other recent dischargees. He went on the Drill Sergeant Path and spent time on the trail. Served with some elite units like the 101st Airborne and 1st Cav. But a couple of points of disagreement I have with him.
1. Confused about battlefield awards I understand why a 1SG gets a BRONZE STAR (meritorious) vs a E1-E4 getting a ARCOM (meritorious). But apparently nobody explained to him how the awards system works. In peace time garrison you had to almost be the second comming of Christ to get an ARCOM, very rare and it was not given out lightly. Still if he had a exceptional writeup then one of his E1-E4 could have done better with an award. Also, part of this is why the Infantry gets to wear the Blue Cord and Discs for doing their regular job. Over and above their job then yes they should get higher than ARCOM. They gave out ARCOMS in Vietnam as well. So this is not really a GWOT wartime thing.
2. Someone told him how RECRUITING works he hasn't really done it, you can tell from his comments. RECRUITER has the say who gets in and who does not, the quota stuff exists but the overwhealming pressure to make quota I was told disappeared over a decade ago. The quota is still there but you don't see NCO's crying about missing quota as they did in the 1990's when I was at USAREC as a civilian. A lot of that pressure is gone now.
3. Overweight issues date from the 1980's nothing has changed there with the decades long argument of what is obesity and what should and should not pass tape. In my view thats Army life some folks are going to scam and get away with it. That is what periodic RiFs are for.
4. Tatoos I agree with the policy it was a LOT stricter in the 1980's and I am not sure why they slacked up on the policy but the slacking up has caused a lot of confusion and hard feelings.
Just four of the points I disagree with off the bat, probably more. Anyways sorry in advance for the profanity he should have screened that out for youtube but he is fairly recent dischargee and that profanity habit hard to break. Took me a few years after ETS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RprtLmK8yqc
1. Confused about battlefield awards I understand why a 1SG gets a BRONZE STAR (meritorious) vs a E1-E4 getting a ARCOM (meritorious). But apparently nobody explained to him how the awards system works. In peace time garrison you had to almost be the second comming of Christ to get an ARCOM, very rare and it was not given out lightly. Still if he had a exceptional writeup then one of his E1-E4 could have done better with an award. Also, part of this is why the Infantry gets to wear the Blue Cord and Discs for doing their regular job. Over and above their job then yes they should get higher than ARCOM. They gave out ARCOMS in Vietnam as well. So this is not really a GWOT wartime thing.
2. Someone told him how RECRUITING works he hasn't really done it, you can tell from his comments. RECRUITER has the say who gets in and who does not, the quota stuff exists but the overwhealming pressure to make quota I was told disappeared over a decade ago. The quota is still there but you don't see NCO's crying about missing quota as they did in the 1990's when I was at USAREC as a civilian. A lot of that pressure is gone now.
3. Overweight issues date from the 1980's nothing has changed there with the decades long argument of what is obesity and what should and should not pass tape. In my view thats Army life some folks are going to scam and get away with it. That is what periodic RiFs are for.
4. Tatoos I agree with the policy it was a LOT stricter in the 1980's and I am not sure why they slacked up on the policy but the slacking up has caused a lot of confusion and hard feelings.
Just four of the points I disagree with off the bat, probably more. Anyways sorry in advance for the profanity he should have screened that out for youtube but he is fairly recent dischargee and that profanity habit hard to break. Took me a few years after ETS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RprtLmK8yqc
(2)
(0)
SPC Patrick R Hughes
Yes US Army is now the PC army brought to you by our commander-in-chief Mr. Obama. This shit has to change and soon.
(1)
(0)
I've noticed that "political correctness" seems to be the popular buzzword when people don't get to indulge in their favorite cliché or prejudice of choice...
(1)
(0)
100% agree. The military and the discipline of soldiers just coming out of basic is garbage. Only few come out with any discipline and that I would chalk up to just them having good personal character.
(1)
(0)
You say emasculation, I say "expected to act like educated adults"... The days of being an illiterate caveman who can follow orders and not much else are gone...
(1)
(0)
This issue has nothing to do with who is president. Trumps the guy now and you still have this trash almost a year later. Also political correctness doesn't mean you're now hindered from accomplishing the mission. Your dumb opinion and my dumb opinion don't keep our bullets from hitting their targets. In fact under the Bush admin during the surge, regulations were at there most lax. We had guys smoking weed, and getting on a plane for war the next day. Or dudes that didn't even come close to height and weight getting on the plane, and its understandable because I'd rather take a fat combat vet to war than a skinny guy who hasn't finished basic yet. Its war, bodies are needed. If the problem has spanned 3 presidents you cant just say its one president's fault. In my opinion (and that's all it is) this has been slowly happening since Vietnam started. When cameras are allowed to broadcast war images you instantly lose civilian support for the war. WW2 was so heavily backed not because we were attacked (because we were on 9/11 as well) but because our government basically lied to its citizens and told them we were winning handily when that wasn't really the case for 80% of the war. If fox news or cnn or brietbart or MSNBC had cameras on the beaches of Normandy and citizens saw entire groups of men being torn apart or drowning before they even landed on the beach the public image would be greatly different. Also since Vietnam our wars have been much more ambiguous we have fought against communism and terrorism which are ideals that you cant line against a wall and shoot or sit down at gun point and force a signed peace treaty. This has all been paired with more "news" and social media surges that give everyone a platform to speak their mind.
Simply put its a much more complex problem than "thanks obummer".
Simply put its a much more complex problem than "thanks obummer".
(0)
(0)
Yes agreed. Your people are well trained when they can do the job without you. That is how you grow.
(0)
(0)
I never knew that allowing all servicemembers, regardless of gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation, a chance to succeed was a bad thing.
(0)
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
He is complaining without knowing the issues. As an example on the surface the Gender Identity thing sounds like social engineering. But when you research the new regulations and there are only 2000-2500 transgenders on Active Duty now, it's really a very trivial change for a tiny population that probably will not even impact him and given the regulations SecDef Ash Carter approved........ the number of transgenders in the Armed Forces will probably decline significantly over the next 10 years. Thats what I suspect with the new regs but we'll see. SecDef Ash Carter was pretty clear he was clarifying a gray area and that was all he was doing in the area of transgenders. But that message was lost on a lot of people and they have never even read the new regulations........the old world was comming to an end and transgenders would be everywhere. Which can't happen because there are not that many of them in the general population either.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next

Pride
Tradition
Discipline
Political Correctness
Command Post
