Airshow under fire....

wsuffa

wsuffa

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
23,615
Location
DC Suburbs
Display Name
Display name:
Bill S.
http://wcco.com/politics/combat.simulation.duluth.2.765901.html

DULUTH, Minn. (AP) ― Some community members are calling for a boycott of the Duluth Air Show because of a combat simulation that U.S. Army recruiters will bring to the show.

The Virtual Army Experience demonstrates what life could be like as a soldier. In one scenario, participants transport aid to threatened humanitarian aid workers while using machine guns and a missile launcher to wipe out terrorists who stand in the way.

That has some calling for a boycott of the air show, which comes to Duluth next week.
Click to expand...
 
I wonder if they plan on boycotting video games too!

I agree with this statement
"We have groups of people who are dissatisfied with where our soldiers are around the world today," he said. "The place to protest isn't in front of a recruiting station, but to voice your concerns to congressmen or your senators -- people who have a say."
Click to expand...

The only thing that really bugs me is this is an air show. So if the Army is going to be there they should be emphasizing their aviation program not their ground pounder jobs. But that is just my opinion.
 
dmccormack said:
So two grumpy hippies have the ear of the local paper?
Click to expand...
Dan she (the person raising the objection) is a Iraq war vet, not a hippie. There is no reason for you to attack the messenger.

If you want to criticize her objection I would be more inclined to say that she is not consistent. She says the show is not a recruiting tool for the military, yet raises no objection to the Blue Angels.
 
smigaldi said:
Dan she (the person raising the objection) is a Iraq war vet, not a hippie. There is no reason for you to attack the messenger.
Click to expand...

And how would I know that based on the OP's excerpt?

Anyway, this boycotting thing is out of hand. I agree they should direct their energies via the political process.

Though... I think the "Virtual Army Experience" should be stressing other things besides firing virtual arms at virtual foes. While the generation being recruited is comfortable with video games, the real thing is no video game.

The Army has yet to really figure out how to recruit. The Marines (I know, I know -- I'm always complimenting them) have had a consistent, yet simple message.

I was in when the "Army of One" imbecility started. Man was that dumb. Those of us in were dumbfounded -- how did that slogan comport with everything we were trying to teach about teamwork??

"Be All That You Can be" wasn't a whole lot better.

"We do more before 8 than most people do in a whole day" wasn't exactly a pull for the target demographic.

We were also pretty peeved about Shinsheki's "black berets for all!" move -- especially since most weren't even made in the USA -- it was just a feel-good marketing move.

So lately the Army has been using "gee whiz high tech virtual reality" as a marketing ploy.

It's as if the Army leadership buys into the notion proffered by marketeers that the Army has to hide what it's really about with glitz.
 
dmccormack said:
And how would I know that based on the OP's excerpt?
Click to expand...
You wouldn't. That's why he posted a link to the entire article, which you are encouraged to read! POSTING the entire article would be a copyright violation! Poor as much journalism is, you have to expect that there are SOME details in the article that aren't in a 3 paragraph excerpt!
 
dmccormack said:
Anyway, this boycotting thing is out of hand. I agree they should direct their energies via the political process.
Click to expand...
Agree

dmccormack said:
The Army has yet to really figure out how to recruit. The Marines (I know, I know -- I'm always complimenting them) have had a consistent, yet simple message.

I was in when the "Army of One" imbecility started. Man was that dumb. Those of us in were dumbfounded -- how did that slogan comport with everything we were trying to teach about teamwork??

"Be All That You Can be" wasn't a whole lot better.

"We do more before 8 than most people do in a whole day" wasn't exactly a pull for the target demographic.
Click to expand...
I loved that ad, it almost made me consider the Army, but I really liked airplanes better.

dmccormack said:
We were also pretty peeved about Shinsheki's "black berets for all!" move -- especially since most weren't even made in the USA -- it was just a feel-good marketing move.
Click to expand...
I have gotten used to seeing those but at first I was with you. My last job in USAF required me to wear a beret. I came to like it as it was easier to deal with that the c-caps once you got them broken in. But I would have preferred to jsut not wear a hat at all. The station commander at Cape Canaveral decalred the entire facility a no hat area for safety. When I pcs'ed out I could not even find a hat and had to buy a whole new set. Loved workign there. It was like a 9-5 job. Too bad they sent my but to a combat unit, that was an eye opener!

dmccormack said:
So lately the Army has been using "gee whiz high tech virtual reality" as a marketing ploy.

It's as if the Army leadership buys into the notion proffered by marketeers that the Army has to hide what it's really about with glitz.
Click to expand...
In the mid 90's there was a move to make all of the branches more business like. We were forced to read all that management theory books that the business people read and start putting those ideas to work in our units. I thought it was a stupid idea then and I still think it is. I still have to read a few of those management self help books for my job and they are a bunch of stupid snake oil for talentless people IMHO. Those theories have no place in the military nor does some of the feel good marketing stuff. I still cannot figure out why they do not market the military for what it is a, a challenge that is rewarding.
 
smigaldi said:
In the mid 90's there was a move to make all of the branches more business like. We were forced to read all that management theory books that the business people read and start putting those ideas to work in our units. I thought it was a stupid idea then and I still think it is. I still have to read a few of those management self help books for my job and they are a bunch of stupid snake oil for talentless people IMHO. Those theories have no place in the military nor does some of the feel good marketing stuff. I still cannot figure out why they do not market the military for what it is a, a challenge that is rewarding.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, I transferred from the Air Force (after 10 years enlisted) to the Army and this was one of the reasons. The AF was becoming an Airline with Bombs. We spent more time in "classes" about "management" than preparing for war.

The Army won me over with the promise of being a "Leader."

OCS was all about leadership. The "M" word was never mentioned.

This remained as long as I stayed in line units. When I was up for Major and BN Staff, I had 20+ years so I cashed in my "Get out of jail free" retirement card.
 
Arclight strike on the paper?
 
smigaldi said:
I still cannot figure out why they do not market the military for what it is a, a challenge that is rewarding.
Click to expand...

How about: "The Few. The Proud. The Marines."

The Navy's site is a complete mess: http://www.navy.mil/swf/index.asp

The Air Force "It Takes the US Air Force to Protect America in a Changing World"

What?

The Coast Guard site is not bad: http://www.gocoastguard.com

I'm trying to talk my 18 year son into the CG is he wants to enlist and not be an officer (You get to stay on the beach! They base you at places like Ocean City! They don't usually go overseas!).

He thinks Army SF/Ranger is his thing. I have some SF buddies that may dissuade him --or at least I hope they do, if I want to stay married to his mom!

:rolleyes:
 
When I enlisted, it was a choice between the CG and the Marines. I chose the CG because I felt (at the time - this was 1988) that I'd spend less time "practicing" and more time "doing" in the CG.

The other services weren't even under consideration. The army is practically 5+ services in one, plus a whole bunch of stuff that should be done by civilians anyway. The Navy is similar, maybe 3 services in one, plus support.

This topic is giving me memories of RAH's "Starship Troopers" (the book NOT the movie), which I always thought did a fine job of laying out what a combat service should be all about.
 
We've been getting anti-military demonstrations & yapping the last few years in Seattle over the Blue Angels aerobatics show each early August.

This year, they're adding fuel cost concerns. I guess it's about 20% more cost over last year. No objections yet to the hydroplane races that I've heard.
 
I'll have to dig through the newpaper archives, but I think last year there were reports at the air show in Kansas City that a WWII re-enactment had some people complaining about 'glorifying' war.
 
I wonder what opposition there has been to the Tora Tora Tora Group demonstrations. After all, that only shows how the enemy of the time killed several thousand Americans; something not disputed by history nor even misrepresented by the media.

Is the Army's demonstration one of showing exactly how they operate or is it a demonstration of violence just to be violent? I hardly think it's the latter. And, if it instills some pride in what these service members are charged with accomplishing, so be it. If one is inspired to join and serve, all the better.

This demonstration is a lot more realistic in this time than simply showing someone going to daily drills, working on a Jeep or cooking then getting a free education. These days, a military service member truly earns every dime of income and benefit and they still don't get enough.
 
Matthew said:
I'll have to dig through the newpaper archives, but I think last year there were reports at the air show in Kansas City that a WWII re-enactment had some people complaining about 'glorifying' war.
Click to expand...
I bet that did have something to do with the Tora group.
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
I'm trying to talk my 18 year son into the CG is he wants to enlist and not be an officer (You get to stay on the beach! They base you at places like Ocean City! They don't usually go overseas!).

He thinks Army SF/Ranger is his thing. I have some SF buddies that may dissuade him --or at least I hope they do, if I want to stay married to his mom!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Funny you should bring this up. My Mother in Laws boyfriend, hell he's 80 do you still call him a BOYfriend" Was in WWII. We were having lunch two months ago and were talking about the service. He said his mother told him to enlist in the Coast Guard because they don't go to war and he'll stay stateside. So he enlists and promptly finds out the CG has one of the highest fatality rates in the War because they are the guys that were driving those Landing craft on Normandy LSTs I think they were called.
 
AdamZ said:
Funny you should bring this up. My Mother in Laws boyfriend, hell he's 80 do you still call him a BOYfriend" Was in WWII. We were having lunch two months ago and were talking about the service. He said his mother told him to enlist in the Coast Guard because they don't go to war and he'll stay stateside. So he enlists and promptly finds out the CG has one of the highest fatality rates in the War because they are the guys that were driving those Landing craft on Normandy LSTs I think they were called.
Click to expand...

You're right! The CG manned most of the LSTs.

The CG is also pulling duty in the Gulf (IIRC)

My Father was on subs and Destroyer Escorts in WW2 in the Pacific.

He told me, "Whatever you do -- don't join the Navy."

Of course he was Court Martialed for enlisting under a false name at 15. Spent one day in the brig at War's end, then was sent to Nagasaki for the occupation.
 
dmccormack said:
He told me, "Whatever you do -- don't join the Navy."
Click to expand...
My dad told me the same thing!!

He was ex-Army BTW.

I enjoyed the USAF, I had considered the Marines (Naval infantry). But now that I am working with the USCG if I had to do active duty all over again I would do it with the Coast Guard. A much better way of life and a mission that is alway real world.
 
dmccormack said:
He told me, "Whatever you do -- don't join the Navy."
Click to expand...

smigaldi said:
My dad told me the same thing!!
Click to expand...


Funny, my dad served in the Navy during WWII and he thought they treated him very well. He was a Pharmacist's Mate 3c. His final duty station was on the campus of UC Berkeley, where my mom was a student. He thought that worked out just fine. They went to high school together, so they didn't meet at Berkeley. He was young, turned 19 a few days after the surrender in Tokyo Bay.
 
smigaldi said:
My dad told me the same thing!!

He was ex-Army BTW.

I enjoyed the USAF, I had considered the Marines (Naval infantry). But now that I am working with the USCG if I had to do active duty all over again I would do it with the Coast Guard. A much better way of life and a mission that is alway real world.
Click to expand...

Yep --CG seems for real down to the EM level.

The AF is all about pilots. In SAC we had a saying, "If you ain't a pilot, you ain't $%**"

A Major without wings was a joke.

I work for a Navy contractor now and spend lots of time with Navy types. There is no group more enamored of Acronyms than the Navy -- holy SURFLANTCOM, Batman!

What I appreciated most about the Army was the focus on Leadership. In Line units officers and soldiers share everything. As a Platoon Leader (LT) and later a Company Commander (CPT), I ate last, showered last, slept last -- anything good, I did last, anything bad, I led the way.

That's as it should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top