Should i be envious of those who served in the military?

[eli77]

Have some friends who went in no officers but have mixed emotions about their time in.Anyone want to chime in?

 

[jimwho]

For a lot of us it was our only place/option to go. Too many variables to be envious imo. But I am proud of
Anyone that did any type of stint. Extra recognition for putting your life on the line.

 

[Billtx49]

Veteran status has many after service benefits including free burial, schooling, and health options, but the main things to gain from the military are discipline and laser focused job commitment…
They’re in the business of building Men.

 

[forcerecon01]

Veteran status has many after service benefits including free burial, schooling, and health options, but the main things to gain from the military are discipline and laser focused job commitment…
They’re in the business of building Men.

I'm a U.S. Vet from the Corps. Much respect to anyone who wore the uniform and served.

 

[Billtx49]

I'm a U.S. Vet from the Corps. Much respect to anyone who were the uniform and served.

Semper Fi

 

[forcerecon01]

Semper Fi

ditto

 

[EyeBRollin]

No, you should not be envious of those who join the military. Ever wonder why the well-off don’t send their children into the military?

The military does positive things for our country and builds character. We are grateful for those who serve. However, in modern times it is basically a Federal jobs program.

 

[eli77]

ditto

how are you doing metally?

 

[Bokanovsky]

Veteran status has many after service benefits including free burial, schooling, and health options, but the main things to gain from the military are discipline and laser focused job commitment…
They’re in the business of building Men.

Actually, they are in the business of building machines who will obey without questioning orders. That is the number one purpose of military training. Take a person who thinks for himself, break him down, and turn him into someone who does what he’s told. That’s the one aspect of military service that has always seemed like a major turn-off. The military does not seem to be a good fit for someone who is individualistic and independently-minded. Having said that, I have great respect for people who volunteer to serve.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

don’t forget financial services USAA.

Veteran status has many after service benefits including free burial, schooling, and health options, but the main things to gain from the military are discipline and laser focused job commitment…
They’re in the business of building Men.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

I understand how someone who has not served in the US armed forces may feel that way.

The service in the US teaches leadership, how to lead other men in combat arms (mostly). This requires thought synthesis and on the spot judgement, hardly the realm of the mindless automatons most “free thinkers” believe members to be.

Actually, they are in the business of building machines who will obey without questioning orders. That is the number one purpose of military training. Take a person who thinks for himself, break him down, and turn him into someone who does what he’s told. That’s the one aspect of military service that has always seemed like a major turn-off. The military does not seem to be a good fit for someone who is individualistic and independently-minded. Having said that, I have great respect for people who volunteer to serve.

 

[forcerecon01]

I have thought about this myself. I never served, but neither did 90-95% of my peers. (I'm Gen X). While I admire those that served, don't feel guilty that you didn't or envious of those that have.

Now, if you were part of the Greatest Generation (WW2) and didn't serve, than I would see a problem there.

How did guys like Sinatra (who claimed 4F) and John Wayne go through life and not feel ashamed or guilty for NOT serving when just about every Tom, **** and Harry went in.

Heck, my Italian-American Grandfather was 33 when the war broke out. He served in the Navy when he was 36 in 1944-45, despite having an infant at home. He was older and didn't have to serve, but he did anyway and I respect that.

military servicemen and women deserve respect.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Have some friends who went in no officers but have mixed emotions about their time in.Anyone want to chime in?

You shouldn't be envious of anyone. Go live your best life and stop comparing yourself to others.

 

[Black Widow Void]

Have some friends who went in no officers but have mixed emotions about their time in.Anyone want to chime in?

Never served, but have great respect for those that voluntarily did.

It’s a culture and lifestyle that has absolutely no appeal to me, but I’d not have this freedom to choose… if not for their participation.

Any time at a bar and I meet someone that’s served, I always by them a drink. $5.00 is a small price to pay… for them enlisting in something that I’d rather avoid.

 

[Bokanovsky]

I understand how someone who has not served in the US armed forces may feel that way.

The service in the US teaches leadership, how to lead other men in combat arms (mostly). This requires thought synthesis and on the spot judgement, hardly the realm of the mindless automatons most “free thinkers” believe members to be.

If true, wouldn’t that create the problem of “too
many chiefs, not enough indians”? How can you have a hierarchical organization where everyone is a leader? Who’s going to be following those leaders?
And I’m not saying that soldiers on the battlefield are “mindless automatons”. Clearly, they have to make tactical decision based on situational analysis. I was talking about something broader, namely the culture of conformity that MUST exist in any functional military organization. You follow the orders of your superiors. You don’t substitute your judgment for theirs. If you do, you will be charged with insubordination.

 

[Jake_Gyllenhaal69]

no, who cares, worry about what you can control right now to fix your life. There's people that benefited from the military and there's people that didn't.

 

[Pierce Manhammer]

You’re not getting it and I cannot explain it to you. All good bro.

If true, wouldn’t that create the problem of “too
many chiefs, not enough indians”? How can you have a hierarchical organization where everyone is a leader? Who’s going to be following those leaders?
And I’m not saying that soldiers on the battlefield are “mindless automatons”. Clearly, they have to make tactical decision based on situational analysis. I was talking about something broader, namely the culture of conformity that MUST exist in any functional military organization. You follow the orders of your superiors. You don’t substitute your judgment for theirs. If you do, you will be charged with insubordination.

 

[Am Shaegar]

Have some friends who went in no officers but have mixed emotions about their time in.Anyone want to chime in?

The military in Western countries went down hill like the education systems. There is nothing to be envious about being stuck in it. There are ups and downs in being in an army depeing on your role in it, but the biggest up is the training and education they finance you when you get out. Of course the downside is that you are a cheap disposalbe meatbag that can be send off to war to get killed. And the propaganda you are subjected to.

Historically speaking, being a common soldier was seen as a dishonest profession until the world wars came. Being an officer(a real officer not an NCO) on the other hand was seen with prestige, because it meant you made it into upper class. I have some ancestors who joined the military to step up the social ladder.

 

[T_Rex]

No, you should not be envious of those who join the military. Ever wonder why the well-off don’t send their children into the military?

The military does positive things for our country and builds character. We are grateful for those who serve. However, in modern times it is basically a Federal jobs program.

"well off" do send their children to the military. Not in the same numbers for obvious reasons but there are kids from all sorts of families in the military.

Actually, they are in the business of building machines who will obey without questioning orders. That is the number one purpose of military training. Take a person who thinks for himself, break him down, and turn him into someone who does what he’s told. That’s the one aspect of military service that has always seemed like a major turn-off. The military does not seem to be a good fit for someone who is individualistic and independently-minded. Having said that, I have great respect for people who volunteer to serve.

Everything you said before "having said that" is the opposite of reality. And that has been the case for at least the past 100 years or so. In fact, "individualistic and independently-minded" is the trait you can describe most servicemen.

 

[T_Rex]

If true, wouldn’t that create the problem of “too
many chiefs, not enough indians”? How can you have a hierarchical organization where everyone is a leader? Who’s going to be following those leaders?
And I’m not saying that soldiers on the battlefield are “mindless automatons”. Clearly, they have to make tactical decision based on situational analysis. I was talking about something broader, namely the culture of conformity that MUST exist in any functional military organization. You follow the orders of your superiors. You don’t substitute your judgment for theirs. If you do, you will be charged with insubordination.

You have a misunderstanding of what leadership is and you're confusing leadership with tyranny. Nobody respects or follows tyrants. That's not how leadership works.

See, the military is a highly efficient organization. It must be, otherwise it fails. You'll lose soldiers and equipment and training time. If you don't see your subordinates as people willing and able to make their own judgements and decisions and train them accordingly, you'll fail (and not only in the military). And in case you're not taking it into account, all servicemen go through military training. All servicemen are taught and train to lead and to follow. A lieutenant is below a captain in the chain of command but he's above sergeants. So he MUST lead and follow at the same time. All people are trained to lead and to follow. Nobody just leads and nobody just follows. It's not a question of "chiefs and indians".

The most effective and time-efficient way to lead is to give your subordinates broad concepts and let them work out the details. And that works wherever. You're all working towards the same goal. They trust you know what you're doing and you have trained them, so you trust them in what they are doing. To tell them what you people must accomplish (and leave space for them to discuss this if needed). They work out how. Otherwise you'll micromanage and be a bad leader; your mission will not be accomplished or it'll be subpar. And you'll not have time to micromanage anyway. Your performance will also be subpar.

And no, you're not talking about something broader, you're emitting an opinion on a topic you don't understand based on preconceived notions you didn't gave yourself the trouble to check if they are true or not. The next time this happens, just don't. Check first.