Loyalty in the Army and in Life

W. Edwards Deming Dept.

 

.

=== Nathan says, re: the US military ===

The idea is put forward that the Army is not acting exclusively in its self-interest when training, paying, and feeding the Soldier. 

This may not be the appropriate forum, but could you expand on these premises? I'd genuinely like to explore this.

.

=== Jeff says, re:  the US military ===

Sure.  First topic - Have you served?

Let's start with:  who are the people you have best known, who have had honorable careers in the U.S. armed forces?  Could you tell us a little bit about those people?

.

=== Nathan says ===

I have not served. My father served in the Air Force in his younger years. He was mostly absent from my life but is, on the whole, a good man. My father-in-law (the man I admire most in life) is a career marine and is currently making his living as an instructor at a military academy. To keep this short, he's a great man. My wife's ex served in the army and I would consider his overall worth to be less than ideal. : )

.

=== Jeff says, re:  the US military ===

There we go.  My experience has been similar.  The Servicemembers I have known have been a cross-section of society generally.  Most of them are good men (and women), and some of them are bozos.

The same is true at Boeing.  The same was true in my 11th-grade class.  The same is true at the church where I work.  The U.S. Army is made up of people.  It's not a cyber-organism.  When you say "the Army cares about its Soldiers" or "Boeing cares about its employees" you are saying that the Major cares about people, that the District Manager cares about people.  Which they do.

..........

One of my best friends, a guy named Ed, is a crusty old drill sergeant who, one time after his recruits had a lousy day at the range, walked them all into the shower and punched them one by one.  He got busted down in rank and put at a recruiting station.

But he was a good man, and he cared about the young men he trained, and he wanted to make the world a better place.  That guy IS the Army, and he wasn't acting exclusively in his self-interest when he trained recruits.  He was living his life according to his beliefs.

If Ed had been in a firefight in Jordan, and one of his men caught a bullet, you think Ed would have carried his man out on his back, at risk to his own life?  You'd better believe it.  Why?  What do you think motivates him - and by extension, what motivates the Army?

You want rreeeaaaaallll inspiration, start with stories of Army heroism.  The guy in the picture above is an example.  In Afghanistan 2009, Staff Sgt. Romesha's position was overrun by the enemy.  Men around him dead and dying, his position ... um ... "tactically indefensible," Staff Sgt. Romesha dug in like a pit bull and "led the fight to protect the bodies of fallen Soldiers, provide cover to those Soldiers seeking medical assistance, and reclaim the American outpost."

The President said, "Throughout history, the question has often been asked, why? Why do those in uniform take such extraordinary risks? And what compels them to such courage? You ask Clint and any of these Soldiers who are here today, and they'll tell you. Yes, they fight for their country, and they fight for our freedom. Yes, they fight to come home to their families. But most of all, they fight for each other, to keep each other safe and to have each other's backs."

There's no end of these stories of loyalty.  Yet sometimes it seems that every Soldier, and commander, would do the same.  Is the Army strictly self-interested and exploitative?  Well, are the people IN it that way?

...........

More than 50 years ago now, W. Edwards Deming changed the face of Corporate America by convincing the CEO's of a very simple thing.

Nobody wakes up in the morning, driving to work, wanting to do a lousy job that day.

Once the CEO's were able to see this, the CEO's were able to place a tiny drop of trust and faith in their people, and to start giving them some respect.  To start treating them like fellow human beings.  I've known a college professor or two who could have done with a smmaallllll dose of this respect for the average American.

Sergeants in the Army don't wake up thinking about how they can do a lousy job that day.  Neither does Eric Wedge.  These guys love their wives, love their sons, and want to make the world a better place.  

You put a young man's life in their hands?  They're not hoping to ruin the young man's life.

Sure, the Seattle Mariners want to win.  They've got 15 guys who would like to be the starting catcher this spring, and they MUST tell 14 of them No.  But the Mariners would like to treat those 14 men well.

The Army wants to win its wars.  But the commanders in the Army would also like to see the young men, under their command, better themselves.  And go on to good lives.

.

Comments

Nathan H's picture

Nathan H

::Nods::
Good points and applicable throughout life. Any invented entity doesn't *really* exist. People exist and it is people who shape a given circumstance. In that light, no, no entity can be exclusively one thing or another.

But these invented things, a country, a military organization, a Sunday brunch steering committee all are invented for a *purpose*. A group of people get together to decide what is the best way to accomplish a specific purpose and create an organization to accomplish it. The members of the organization that drive that organizational thinking, their thoughts and beliefs, direct the purpose of that organization. The policies enacted by an organization (in this case feeding, clothing, and training a soldier) are self-serving even if they also might have an ancillary benefit to the soldier. The army isn't in the business of creating good citizens, it's in the business of completing specific objectives by any means. The treatment of the soldier are a means to that end exclusively.

I don't know. You make good points in this article.

1

There are 300 million Americans milling around :- ) but when we add a Constitution, a flag, a territory, a set of laws, a tax system, we have a Nation.

There is the U.S. Senate, which forms when a gavel bangs, and there are U.S. Senators who go home and, apparently, work out with P90X.  That entity "U.S. Senate" exists.

That Senate, as an entity, "believes" in certain things, has a mission, correct?  It's not to fly to the moon or perform abortions or win the American League pennant.  It's to uphold the Constitution and provide expediencies toward life, liberty and happiness.  The Senate's "purpose" is identifiable.

..............

That the Army is NOT in the business of creating good men, I'll have to take the other side on that one.  Bat571, Lonnie, and others will take the other side also (as far as their branches go!).

It isn't Staff Sgt. Romesha alone who believes in Loyalty, Duty, and Honor.  Those are institutionalized Army Core Values.

To the extent the Army, as an institution, believes anything, it believes in Loyalty, Duty and Honor just like it believes in winning wars.  Ask the Servicemembers.

..............

You can say that it's in the Army's own interest to create men of good character, and you'd be right.  But it's in my own interest to make a good man out of my son.  It's in my own interest to send cash to poor people in the Philippines; I get self-esteem out of it, right?

... if I CHOOSE to sourly deny all my fellow human beings any credit for anything they do -- because you CAN always argue that I was self-motivated! -- then where will I end up?

2

Nathan H's picture

Nathan H

If I were to speak to the goals of military duty toward the individual, I'd be speaking from ignorance. I can defer to those who have served in this case. To those who have served, are Loyalty, Duty, and Honor instilled to make you a better person or because it would make you a better soldier?

3

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <i> <b> <img> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <div> <strong> <p> <br> <u>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Shoutbox

Please log in or create an account to post shouts.
moethedogMLBTR has it that the Cubs rejected a Yankees bid on Ruggiano. Initeresting. Are they looking at a better bid by someone else? Could be. He's a RHB OF'er worth getting. Franklin might do it straight up.52 min 18 sec ago
bsrDept of Who Knew? Per Wikipedia: Benjamin Isaac Broussard (born September 24, 1976) is an American professional baseball first baseman. He is currently a musician, and still plays baseball in Mexico City, Mexico, for the Diablos Rojos and the Long Island Ducks in the Atlantic League of Professional Baseball ... Broussard has released two full-length music albums. The first, his self-titled album, was released in 2005. The second, Renovated, was released in 2009. He was also featured on the album, Oh Say Can You Sing?, a compilation of different Major League Baseball players singing their favorite songs. On that album Broussard sang U2's With or Without You. He is now a full-time musician.8 hours 36 min ago
Bat571vR ABs = 21410 hours 28 min ago
Bat571Now, about platoon splits. Some guys don't seem to have them. Patrick Kivlehan in 71 G at Jackson, covering 259 ABs - Overall = .317/.389/.510/.899, vL = .311/.392/.511/.903, vR = .318/.389/.509/.898. That is the closest I have ever seen for that many ABs (vL = 45, vR =24). He has become some kinda hittter! Walking 10.2% and K'ing 18.8% as well. Can you really ask for more?10 hours 29 min ago
Bat571When he first came up, he was able to do it - I'm hoping he can rediscover how.11 hours 1 min ago
Bat571We'll just have to see what Mr. Ackley does when pitchers adjust. When he was pulling off, the books was away,away. Now that he's staying on the ball and obviously seeing it well, they'll start busting him and moving his feet. If HoJo can get him through that by helping him keep his hands in and scorch a few down the RF line while not pulling off, then the skills change will start to show - he'll see the ball more consistently and his walk rate should increase and his Ks go back down to his minors numbers. IF ......11 hours 10 min ago
Bat571Matt - I think we are seeing the same things - by keeping his head still and his shoulder closed, he IS seeing the ball better. If he CAN continue to do so, then it will start to show up as a skills change. It hasn't yet, but as he gains confidence, it either will, or he'll start pulling off again and the ball will no longer be seen as clearly, and he'll go back to OPSing .640.11 hours 24 min ago
bsrPut it this way, you can be a snake businessman and get results, and in a competitive field like pro sports...(most) sins will be forgiven for a winner. Nothing terribly wrong with this type of behavior for a F500 exec, it's not like Jack is an ambassador negotiating peace in the Middle East here. But when you don't get results to outweigh the bad behavior...it doesn't look so good.11 hours 31 min ago
bsrWeren't the Yanks all upset a few years back about Z backing out of the Lee for Montero deal last minute when he got Smoak on the line from TX? It's the same snakey behavior as this article is citing. I mean, you can view this all as a vast conspiracy / gamesmanship attempt against the downtrodden M's...or you can take it at face value and see it as Z being called out repeatedly by many sources for being a bush league executive. (With both his peers and his subordinates -- sure he might be a good drafter but that's not about relationships.)11 hours 36 min ago
bsrI don't read the Rosenthal article as an indictment of the ownership group, I read it as a critique of Z. "Rival executives" know what any Mariner GM has to deal with behind the scenes, the situation has been the same for decades. If they thought Z was a decent guy making his best effort to overcome well-known challenges, I can't see why they'd sling mud at him publicly like this. I think we are seeing another indicator, in line w/ Baker's reporting, that Z is an unliked guy and a weak GM. Of course the piece could be off base, but OTOH when's the last time we heard anything good about Z? Where there's multiple plumes of smoke...11 hours 49 min ago
SABR MattLOL...interesting how we came to opposite conclusions even though we're both seeing the same guy and both encouraged with the better looking ABs right now. I'm just not seeing big changes in the component stats that would suggest that there's a real skills change in the works. Makes me think he's seeing the ball real well right now but whatever mechanical changes he's made aren't likely to last.11 hours 51 min ago
Bat571Is that going to be enough to carry lineup weight from LF? Well, he's still better suited in my mind to 2B, but Cano answers that question both ways - Ackley won't displace him, but Robbie hits so well he gives some room for a lighter bat in LF.12 hours 4 min ago
Bat571Ackley: the hitting is real - he looks like he did when he first came up and was putting up decent numbers, before Wedge tried changing him. Whether it's sustainable is a whole different matter. he's tinkered so much with things since he came up, I'm surprised he's back striding into the ball and getting solid, shoulder-driven wood on it. I'd say if he can keep his focus for a few more weeks, pitchers will start pounding him and we'll see if he can keep his shoulder in still. If so, he may be able to be the hitter he should be, a doubles, gap-to-gap hitter with good speed; a perfect #2 or a #6-7 to keep rallies going. A hitter in AAA threatening his job would, in my opinion, help him keep his focus and get him to keep attacking the ball. But HoJo seems to have gotten into his head enough I have some hope.12 hours 5 min ago
SABR Matthis secondary stats haven't changed much from prior seasons. His LD% is down but his ISO is back to career norms rather than paltry like last year. His plate discipline stats are normal for him except that he's generally swinging more often. His walk rate is down with no change in K rate. In the most recent month or so, his K/BB is 12/2 (that's not good) and his ISO is a normal .115 or so. The main change is BABIP, which is normally around .310 for his career but is over .450 during the hot streak with no change in LD%. I'm gonna say...not real.12 hours 23 min ago
gulpThing about Byrd is not only that extra 8 mil when he&amp;#039;s 38, but the Phillies want Maurer or Erasmo AND Guerrero or Wilson for him.... And Byrd kinda seems like a Honda Civic when the gas light comes on... You know you&amp;#039;ve got a little driving time left, but don&amp;#039;t get on the highway12 hours 38 min ago
GLSQuestion for anyone that would like to venture an opinion: is the recent Ackley hitting streak real and sustainable? What's going on there?12 hours 39 min ago
DaddyOYes, YES! There are prospects about to die on the vine if we don't use them for SOME-thing.14 hours 38 min ago
Bat571And the thought of Souza in AAA may help the concentration of Ackley.14 hours 59 min ago
Bat571I'm hoping the first move is Franklin or Noriega+CSmith for Souza. I can see him as the kind of player that could come up in September as an older prospect who takes his chance and runs with it.15 hours 1 min ago
GLSThe Marlon Byrd deal ought to be doable. Even with the risk of the extra year, it's only 1 year at 8 million. That's hardly an albatross. And if it keeps you in he hunt this year without having to give up anything good, it seems like a worthy expenditure.15 hours 19 min ago