121–130 of 599 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What made you think Seals are primadonnas? Does this apply to other special forces too?
They don't do anything without $40 billion of air assets circling their position providing cover and get pissy when you tell them they have to shave and can't paint their weapons arbitrary colors. Also they're all on drugs and will kill you if you report them for embezzling unit funds.
To be fair to the SEALs, this is every US SF unit.
Artillery crew members who fired thousands of rounds in combat came home plagued by hallucinations and psychosis Could this problem also be affecting civilian gun enthusiasts? Or is the order of magnitude of the exposure just wildly lower compared to the military, even in the most enthusiastic?
It reminds me of the other side, the receiving end: shell shock in WW1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_shock
I think the key here is to explore all options, not limiting yourself to the obvious.
Steel Industry: In the steel mills people reported similarities 100-60 years ago. I remember talking to workers and their problems after being exposed to huge mechanical machines that form steel. Usually they are extremely loud, feel like a permanent earthquake, dusty and toxic air, hot temperatures and high risk for life threatening events.
I see some similarities here between steel worker’s mental impact and military. It is fair to say that some conditions are not really helping you as an individual “unlocking your full potential”. Some conditions are simply very detrimental to your health.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article doesn’t say why. It alludes to bureaucracy. Either way, I don’t think unsubstantiated cynicism is productive.
I find it difficult to believe that a coterie of seal spouses coordinated a brain study of their dead husbands and after finding a smoking gun, none of them thought to fire off a message to anybody in the Navy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What made you think Seals are primadonnas? Does this apply to other special forces too?
They don't do anything without $40 billion of air assets circling their position providing cover and get pissy when you tell them they have to shave and can't paint their weapons arbitrary colors. Also they're all on drugs and will kill you if you report them for embezzling unit funds.
This is maybe not too related to the brain damage stuff (or maybe it is?), but I don't think the wider public knows nearly enough about the frankly shocking kinds and amounts of criminality in the various US special forces units. OP is not kidding about these people operating as gangs (but worse, because they're sanctioned killers).
A smattering of such behavior:
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/07/internal-study-defe...
https://news.usni.org/2021/01/24/seal-sentenced-to-10-years-...
https://abc7chicago.com/us-navy-seals-seal-training-drugs-in...
The journalist (and Army vet, iirc) Seth Harp does yeoman's work on this topic, and is a good Twitter follow. He's got several excellent long-form investigative articles, often for Rolling Stone. Here's one on the rampant murders (ongoing!) at Fort Bragg that the Army won't talk about:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/fort-b...
And another one about rampant drug deaths at ... also Fort Bragg:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/inside...
I think it's time to have a big cultural conversation about how much our current era of spec ops worship is worth all the war crimes and other less-than-normative behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I interpreted it as “there’s such a big difference between artillery and a handgun you clearly have never been around an actual gun being fired before” Still snarky, but there is a point.
How does saying “you should expose yourself to both things if you possibly can” express that there is a difference between the two? I suppose I can imagine that GP said that you can feel the difference between levels of brain damage incurred (they did not), but even if that were the case then why would you encourage someone to expose themselves to artillery if you thought the damage was more than zero? “The damage fr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What made you think Seals are primadonnas? Does this apply to other special forces too?
They don't do anything without $40 billion of air assets circling their position providing cover and get pissy when you tell them they have to shave and can't paint their weapons arbitrary colors. Also they're all on drugs and will kill you if you report them for embezzling unit funds.
I sense a lot of bitterness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how do you know that?
I'm into sports shooting, and during winter our club has an indoor range that used to be an old bunker. So we're in this 25 foot by 60 foot concrete tunnel, that's about 8 feet tall at most. Not a giant cavern by any means. And closed doors, so just (forced) ventilation open to the outside. I've shot .357 magnum and shotguns in there. It's loud, yes. I wear ear plugs and ear muffs when doing that. But not by any mean…
Don't read into it too much, though. This isn't snark or passive aggression, just genuine interest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.wikihow.com/Avoid-Being-Shot Intrigued, I got some info from wikihow. > If you are a fast runner or have bad knees, run in a straight line away from the attacker towards cover. The faster you can get away, the fewer shots they will be able to fire. >If you are a slower runner and do not have knee trouble, a zig-zag run may be a better option. You may still be hit in this case, but the chances of being hit…
I’m guessing there aren’t many studies on this, but as a young, fast runner I’d zigzag every time if they’re shooting _at_ me. At least run in a straight line that isn’t collinear with the shooter’s position. Obviously, if you can find cover, put it between you and them and cover distance. It’s so, so hard for any amateur to hit a target that is moving radially in a polar coordinate system centered on them, at all. I…
Yeah. Researchers would have liked to interview them, but all the people who zig-zagged in favor of running as fast as they could are dead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many people do you think are in the military? It’s way below one percent in the USA. In the last war we fought, we lost barely any soldiers compared to the number deployed. It’s bad that we lost any, but your argument is logically null. Women aren’t just baby machines, in any case. Nothing is being “reversed” it’s just more equal if everyone is registered for selective service.
Ww2 killed 3% of the earths population. Our bombs are much worse now.
Are you under the impression that we're still doing trench warfare, though?
And any big nukes won't be aimed at soldiers.
By definition "Leadership" in this capitalistic society is predatory - this style extends to the armed forces, where everyone is expendable.