WWII Era Military - Higher standards than today?

RomanEmperor · Sep 28, 2016

I think your average soldier(at least on the Western Allied side) was of far superior quality than the type of person you get today. It's why they're part of "The Greatest Generation"..... What has happened that in a few generations we have went from having such great and honorable warriors to what we have now, where even a far-left social agenda is embedded in the military, and the top brass just accept it lying down? In particular there was a great Marine General, Peter Pace, and Robert Gates(a left-wing hack) ran him out of being CJCS for a second term, and recommended that probably the least worthy person ever to become a four-star Admiral in US military history take his place, and that person helped oversee the destruction of what was left of the moral character of our armed forces. I identify a lot more with the type of people we would see in WWII, and wish their values still resonated today. Was it a PERFECT generation? No... none ever is... but FAR more so than today.

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

RomanEmperor said:
I think your average soldier(at least on the Western Allied side) was of far superior quality than the type of person you get today. It's why they're part of "The Greatest Generation"..... What has happened that in a few generations we have went from having such great and honorable warriors to what we have now, where even a far-left social agenda is embedded in the military, and the top brass just accept it lying down? In particular there was a great Marine General, Peter Pace, and Robert Gates(a left-wing hack) ran him out of being CJCS for a second term, and recommended that probably the least worthy person ever to become a four-star Admiral in US military history take his place, and that person helped oversee the destruction of what was left of the moral character of our armed forces. I identify a lot more with the type of people we would see in WWII, and wish their values still resonated today. Was it a PERFECT generation? No... none ever is... but FAR more so than today.

No No and No again. Most militarys are much smaller and have better training and equipment than they have ever had in the past. They are mostly full time professionals whose trade and vocation is the military and are every bit as brave (or stupid) as soldiers in the past.

RomanEmperor · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
No No and No again. Most militarys are much smaller and have better training and equipment than they have ever had in the past. They are mostly full time professionals whose trade and vocation is the military and are every bit as brave (or stupid) as soldiers in the past.

Lifting UCMJ Article 125 was a disgrace. No one who engages in that sort of behavior has any business wearing a uniform that is supposed to stand for the BEST we have to offer.

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

RomanEmperor said:
Lifting UCMJ Article 125 was a disgrace. No one who engages in that sort of behavior has any business wearing a uniform that is supposed to stand for the BEST we have to offer.

Sorry got no idea what UCMJ 125 is?

RomanEmperor · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
Sorry got no idea what UCMJ 125 is?

It was a US military article.

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

RomanEmperor said:
I think your average soldier(at least on the Western Allied side) was of far superior quality than the type of person you get today. It's why they're part of "The Greatest Generation"..... What has happened that in a few generations we have went from having such great and honorable warriors to what we have now, where even a far-left social agenda is embedded in the military, and the top brass just accept it lying down? In particular there was a great Marine General, Peter Pace, and Robert Gates(a left-wing hack) ran him out of being CJCS for a second term, and recommended that probably the least worthy person ever to become a four-star Admiral in US military history take his place, and that person helped oversee the destruction of what was left of the moral character of our armed forces. I identify a lot more with the type of people we would see in WWII, and wish their values still resonated today. Was it a PERFECT generation? No... none ever is... but FAR more so than today.

So many Depression era possible recruits were turned away for having weak bodies from lack of nutrition that the National School Lunch Program was started to ensure that should that day ever come again the country would have better picks.

Robert Gates, left wing hack?

I'm an Aggie, Gates was my schools former President, Texas A&M is probably the most conservative public university in the nation.

Article 125 prevented men from receiving oral ... from woman. Still against it?

You'd mentioned Peter Pace in another thread too. Why do you think he was such a great leader? Where did you even hear about him? Were you in the military? In the Corps?

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

Not trying to be funny but I've just read it and wow! If I decide to get a BJ from my wife and then pot the brown I've committed two serious offences and deserve to be punished and discharged. If they had stuck to that rule 99% of soldiers in the past would never have made it past a couple of years

.

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
Not trying to be funny but I've just read it and wow! If I decide to get a BJ from my wife and then pot the brown I've committed two serious offences and deserve to be punished and discharged. If they had stuck to that rule 99% of soldiers in the past would never have made it past a couple of years.

The article was never really used, if it had the whole of the military would likely face court martial or nonjudicial punishment. It was a hold over from the days of yore, when all the senior officers were upright good Christian citizens, who only had ... with their wives in the missionary for procreation, accept when they were having ... with 14 year old prostitutes and catching syphilis. Mostly it was used to punish homosexuality or the occasional deviant that tries to have ... with an animal.

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

If it's the ... thing that bothers you it's well known that the numbers of ... men in the military has not changed and there is no reason to think it was any different in the past. Many famous soldiers have been known to be homosexual.

In my own experience in the British army there were always ... men serving. When it was illegal they had to be discreet but everyone knew and as long as they did not make unwanted advances ( and why would they) a blind eye was turned to the issue.

I would also say any military does and should reflect the society it protects and serves. If society is tolerant to homosexuality then the military should be to. Don't blame the military for this blame the society. It also as far as I know has absolutely no impact on the perormance of the military so in the end who cares!

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
If it's the ... thing that bothers you it's well known that the numbers of ... men in the military has not changed and there is no reason to think it was any different in the past. Many famous soldiers have been known to be homosexual.

In my own experience in the British army there were always ... men serving. When it was illegal they had to be discreet but everyone knew and as long as they did not make unwanted advances ( and why would they) a blind eye was turned to the issue.

I would also say any military does and should reflect the society it protects and serves. If society is tolerant to homosexuality then the military should be to. Don't blame the military for this blame the society. It also as far as I know has absolutely no impact on the perormance of the military so in the end who cares!

Speaking as a former Sailor who served with the US Marine Corps I can say that most of the stigma against homosexuality is based on the fear of them using their status to become protected. It happens already with minorities and women, if they show up late for work or do something stupid and you try to chew them out, they threaten an Equal Opportunity complaint. Few do it but enough that at this point, especially in intersex units, commanders leave the door open and have witnesses sit in on all meetings with subordinates, in order to avoid false accusations. So the idea that suddenly they become "enfranchised" to act out at the same time all the leadership within the military becomes scared that they will be on the chopping block for cracking down on the latest presidential decreed victim of oppression.

The other issue isn't so much being ... (everyone knew someone that was ... and kept it on the down low), it was the effeminate ... males that nobody wanted. The military is a macho environment because it has to be, its all about fighting wars, there are few jobs that can be done by weak willed people. Servicemen or women who are protected from getting in trouble, who can act as overly effeminate as they want with nobody allowed to even say "Hey, maybe you should tone that down a bit" without catching a career ending complaints, that hurt a unit's morale and lower its effectiveness.

Most men I met were happy to serve with lesbians, I've had nothing but good experiences with them. They can take a joke, they aren't afraid to get their hands dirty, and often they like the same ...... we guys do, so we have something in common to talk about.

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

aggienation said:
The article was never really used, if it had the whole of the military would likely face court martial or nonjudicial punishment. It was a hold over from the days of yore, when all the senior officers were upright good Christian citizens, who only had ... with their wives in the missionary for procreation, accept when they were having ... with 14 year old prostitutes and catching syphilis. Mostly it was used to punish homosexuality or the occasional deviant that tries to have ... with an animal.

Sounds like one of those holier than thow things that the majority of sensible soldiers and their leaders simply ignore?

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
Sounds like one of those holier than thow things that the majority of sensible soldiers and their leaders simply ignore?

Yes. Its rarely enforced. Usually its something they use to tack on to existing charges, like ...., etc., where they are looking to maximize prison time.

WITSEND · Sep 28, 2016

The biggest impact I saw of the political correctness seeping into the military was sad in most cases demise of on the spot punishment. Anything like that is now regarded as bullying so any punishment has to follow Regs.

Many times in the past when I managed to drop myself in the crap I would get a kick in the arse or a punch for my troubles but knew I deserved the punishment and had received it without any stain on my record. Today any punishment follows Regs and is then recorded for ever on your Rap sheet. There are many guys I know who made fine soldiers and officers in the past that would now not make it through due to being a bit lively in their youth!

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
The biggest impact I saw of the political correctness seeping into the military was sad in most cases demise of on the spot punishment. Anything like that is now regarded as bullying so any punishment has to follow Regs.

Many times in the past when I managed to drop myself in the crap I would get a kick in the arse or a punch for my troubles but knew I deserved the punishment and had received it without any stain on my record. Today any punishment follows Regs and is then recorded for ever on your Rap sheet. There are many guys I know who made fine soldiers and officers in the past that would now not make it through due to being a bit lively in their youth!

The US military is the same, political correctness and the zero defect mentality have destroyed the integrity of the force. Many of the best and brightest, the type that a nation would want in their military, they leave in disgust over not being allowed to properly serve in military outfits that are trying to act less and less like a military every year. Either go into some sort of SOF unit, where its a bit more sane, or get out, that's about the only options, besides just accept being part of a social experiment and draw your pay check.

RomanEmperor · Sep 28, 2016

aggienation said:
The US military is the same, political correctness and the zero defect mentality have destroyed the integrity of the force. Many of the best and brightest, the type that a nation would want in their military, they leave in disgust over not being allowed to properly serve in military outfits that are trying to act less and less like a military every year. Either go into some sort of SOF unit, where its a bit more sane, or get out, that's about the only options, besides just accept being part of a social experiment and draw your pay check.

Then there should have been a coup d'etat rather than accept this. IT will fundamentally change the military, and it's wrong.

Also, to you other people.... of course it is VERY hard to enforce 125 ALL the time, but it's nice knowing that it was there as a way to show that the US Military stands for good decent morality, and that it was enshrined in military law. Nowadays we're supposed to accept all sorts of deviant behavior, open homosexual conduct(which is NOT conducive with camaraderie for sure), TRANSSEXUALS NOW!... yikes.. and sorry, but women in combat roles? They are NOT equal to men in combat, and everyone knows it. That's just downright dumb.

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

RomanEmperor said:
Then there should have been a coup d'etat rather than accept this. IT will fundamentally change the military, and it's wrong.

Also, to you other people.... of course it is VERY hard to enforce 125 ALL the time, but it's nice knowing that it was there as a way to show that the US Military stands for good decent morality, and that it was enshrined in military law. Nowadays we're supposed to accept all sorts of deviant behavior, open homosexual conduct(which is NOT conducive with camaraderie for sure), and sorry, but women in combat roles? They are NOT equal to men in combat, and everyone knows it. That's just downright dumb.

A US military coup d'etat to stop homosexuals from being loud and proud?

Just to make sure I'm not confused on this issue, but you're against heterosexual oral ... and think it is a symptom of poor morality? Or just homosexuals?

nuclearguy165 · Sep 28, 2016

RomanEmperor said:
Then there should have been a coup d'etat rather than accept this. IT will fundamentally change the military, and it's wrong.

Also, to you other people.... of course it is VERY hard to enforce 125 ALL the time, but it's nice knowing that it was there as a way to show that the US Military stands for good decent morality, and that it was enshrined in military law. Nowadays we're supposed to accept all sorts of deviant behavior, open homosexual conduct(which is NOT conducive with camaraderie for sure), TRANSSEXUALS NOW!... yikes.. and sorry, but women in combat roles? They are NOT equal to men in combat, and everyone knows it. That's just downright dumb.

On average, they aren't, but it's to allow the few who are to do so if they wish. Some may worry that it's a slippery slope that will lead to lowered standards of combat fitness, but I really don't think that will happen.

aggienation · Sep 28, 2016

nuclearguy165 said:
On average, they aren't, but it's to allow the few who are to do so if they wish. Some may worry that it's a slippery slope that will lead to lowered standards of combat fitness, but I really don't think that will happen.

It already has happened. Over the last few years USMC School of Infantry lowered the weights and distances done on the humps in expectation of lifting the ban on females. Ranger School did the same thing, over the course of a few years the weights carried during class went from on average of 80+ pound rucksacks to under 50 lbs, with more food given out, just in time to allow women to spend a solid year training for the course to get a few to pass it.

Even now, the US military is lifting the ban on women in combat arms but at they same time they have made it clear that they will not be forcing the women to use a physical fitness test standard of males, because if they did most would fail, or do very poorly. Considering this is all a social experiment in order to appease feminists, they don't care that having two standards is ridiculous, they're going to do it anyway.

Basically everything that people worried about when it came to integrating women, commander's bending over backwards to accommodate, generals straight up lying about effectiveness, pressure to be politically correct resulting in witch hunts, unfit people being given rank and positions they don't rate solely because of their ..., that's happening within the US military. The last eight years has destroyed the morale and effectiveness of the US military in a way that a decade plus of combat never came close to doing.

Von Ranke · Sep 28, 2016

WITSEND said:
The biggest impact I saw of the political correctness seeping into the military was sad in most cases demise of on the spot punishment. Anything like that is now regarded as bullying so any punishment has to follow Regs.

Many times in the past when I managed to drop myself in the crap I would get a kick in the arse or a punch for my troubles but knew I deserved the punishment and had received it without any stain on my record. Today any punishment follows Regs and is then recorded for ever on your Rap sheet. There are many guys I know who made fine soldiers and officers in the past that would now not make it through due to being a bit lively in their youth!

Filling in a charge sheet was always a bigger pain in the backside than inflicting a quick smack in the coupon behind Company HQ. Especially when it came to minor infringements like using elastic bands to tuck in your lightweights over your puttees. Messing up the wording on a rap often led to more grief for an NCO than it did for the offender. Quick justice was usually the best option for both parties, but for offences such as negligent discharges on the firing range then it was always best to go by the book.

Edric Streona · Sep 28, 2016

Load of bloody nonsense.

Mass conscript armies will never be better than small regular ones.

Homosexuality has no impact on people's ability to lead, command or fight ..... Sacred Band of Thebes? Spartans?

Good moral conduct...... usually the people who harp on about that the most on the ones with the darkest twisted perversions they are trying to hide or compensate for. As for it affecting morale? How?

If your in a platoon of people paid to KILL people why would the knowledge one of them likes ... with men hamper unit effectiveness?

Does that hamper their ability to kill？

Search

Search

WWII Era Military - Higher standards than today?

RomanEmperor

WITSEND

RomanEmperor

WITSEND

RomanEmperor

aggienation

WITSEND

aggienation

WITSEND

aggienation

WITSEND

aggienation

WITSEND

aggienation

RomanEmperor

aggienation

nuclearguy165

aggienation

Von Ranke

Edric Streona

More History Discussions

Recent History Discussions

Trending History Discussions