What makes a good soldier?

[Eye In The Sky]

Timmies runs in the mornings would send you up the chain quick.

Leave it to a zoomie...

 

[Kat Stevens]

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.

 

[CougarKing]

New Soldiers are like blank slates waiting to be filled with information. In basic training, they get the entry level instruction in tactics and techniques of their MOS, but the learning never stops. The combat arms (that's my frame of reference, so that's why I specify) are extremely complex and there are layers upon layers that make up the whole. Every team relies on every other team, and every sub-team, and every Soldier within all those sub-teams. I would go so far as to say that many Soldiers don't grasp how complicated the Army is. Especially in peacetime, you never see the thing in in full mass, even on maneuvers like the old REFORGERs. On CALFEX ranges you begin to see the complexity when combat teams move, shoot and communicate with live ammo and supporting arms.

These are the US Army's leadership principles and they go back many, many years. They've been tested and proven again and again in combat and training. I think they offer a great view of not only what it takes to be an effective leader, but to be a follower as well.

The U.S. Army's Eleven Leadership Principles

    * Be tactically and technically proficient
    * Know yourself and seek self-improvement
    * Know your soldiers and look out for their welfare
    * Keep your soldiers informed
    * Set the example
    * Ensure the task is understood, supervised and accomplished
    * Train your soldiers as a team
    * Make sound and timely decisions
    * Develop a sense of responsibility in your subordinates
    * Employ your unit in accordance with its capabilities
    * Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions

cheers, Mark

Mark,

So the US Army's 7-8 core values of Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage, Gratitude are emphasized sparingly in today's US Army, compared to the above leadership principles? What about the 3 General Orders?

 

[Rice0031]

So, all the keys I've learned to be a good soldier (rape; loot; pillage; burninate the peasants) are all wrong? 

 

[Keyboard]

Thanks for all the responses so far.  When I join the reserves, I will definitely do my best to integrate all of these things, until then I can work on these as a civilian. 

Thanks again!

 

[Greymatters]

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.

A bit out of date that one...

 

[medaid]

MedTech - The RCMP would love you.

Stu

Stu,

  Only when they need me. When it's convenient they'll kick me out.

 

[Red 6]

Mark,

So the US Army's 7-8 core values of Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage, Gratitude are emphasized sparingly in today's US Army, compared to the above leadership principles? What about the 3 General Orders?

Techy, The three general orders are specific to guard duty and they detail what a sentry's duties are. The Army hands out dog tags with the core values on them that Soldiers can put on their dog tag chains and also, the Army issues laminated cards with the core values on them. I remember back in the 80s when the US Army started the (overt) mindset of ethics and ethical actions. They came out with the four soldierly virtues, which ultimately morphed into the core values. The original ones were Courage, Competence, Candor and Commitment. I always liked these because they're easy to remember.

West Point's motto is Duty, Honor, Country, which may be the best of all possible sets of core traits of the soldier. The Army (any army) can give you a set of words to memorize for promotion boards, Soldier of the Quarter, or whatever. But more importantly, what is it that makes you as a Soldier different from guy with a gun and a uniform that represents a brutal regime with no ethics? At the point of contat with the enemy, human instinct has hard wired us to do one of two things - fight or run. The training you get, the unit you serve in, the uniform you wear; they are all intended to push you into doing the right thing at that moment. But at that moment of truth, you as a Soldier have to make the decision. Here's one of my favorite quotes. It's from "Fix Bayonets" by Capt John Thomason. (published in 1926):

"There is nothing particularly glorious about sweaty fellows, laden with killing tools, going along to fight. And yet — such a column represents a great deal more than 28,000 individuals mustered into a division. All that is behind those men is in that column, too: the old battles, long forgotten, that secured our nation — traditions of things endured, and things accomplished such as regiments hand down forever...”

Right now here in Eugene, there's a murder trial going on that involves a former Navy Corpsman who did a failure drill on his wife a couple of years ago. It's a long story and terrible in the extreme. This guy was stationed at the Pentagon on 9-11 and basically experienced the whole thing. He then volunteered to be a Corpsman and was assigned to the Fleet Marine Force, but never saw combat. He and his wife had a child and were having marital trouble. They were separated and were in a custody dispute over the baby. So this guy went over to the wife's house with some duct tape, and a shotgun. As police officers were trying to force entry, he executed his wife with a failure drill and then surrendered to the police.

Since there's no possible way in the world this guy can claim he didn't do it, his defense is that he was traumatized by his experiences on 9-11 and that his training turned him into a killing machine. Here's the link to the story in the Eugene Register Guard from 4-10-08.

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.cms.support.viewStory.cls?cid=90982&sid=4&fid=2

This guy's arguing that, in effect, "it's the Marine Corps' fault" since they supposedly conditioned him to be a killing machine. But what he conveniently leaves out is the ethical training he received while he was in the service. As military members of ethics-based military forces, we are at the tip of the spear in deciding how to employ our weapons and tactics. Do it right and no one outside of our small circle will know. Get it wrong, especially out of vengeance or retribution, and the world will probably know tomorrow morning.

cheers and have a great weekend,
Mark

 

[medaid]

Mark,

    That man is a douche bag. He was in the Navy and only attached to the Marines. His first and foremost duty was to provide medical care to troops, and that involves compassion, empathy, respect, integrity, honesty so on and so forth. He was unfit to wear the uniform. He was unfit to call himself a father.

 

[Red 6]

I agree with you 110% Medtech.

 

[CougarKing]

Techy, The three general orders are specific...

Mark,

Thanks for the reply. However, my name's not Techy.  ;D Good to hear that your weather is good down there in the Williamette Valley as you said in your PM. It's great here too in Richmond, BC.

 

[Greymatters]

That man is a douche bag. He was in the Navy and only attached to the Marines. His first and foremost duty was to provide medical care to troops, and that involves compassion, empathy, respect, integrity, honesty so on and so forth. He was unfit to wear the uniform. He was unfit to call himself a father.

The shame of it is that too many people out there will agree that it was the Corps fault, because thats the story they heard and they never checked for any of the associated facts left out...

 

[medaid]

GM agreed mate. It's always easier to blame the institution then the people who has made the mistake. The only fault the Corps had in this matter was not screening him and helping this guy before he went postal. Then again the Navy is so big...

 

[Greymatters]

I was thinking more of people who already have a prejudiced opinion of the military, regardless of what branch of service.  In their minds, every military member is a killer of innocents and the story is merely a tool for propogating their opinions...

 

[Armymedic]

I've been reading around this forum for a while, and I've got a question.  I keep reading about Reserve Force soldiers trying out and making it through JTF-2 selection and the SOAC.  Now, whenever someone describes a Reserve Soldier who has gone to selection, they are described as "switched on", or being "hardcore".  Now, what I'm trying to ask here, is what does someone mean when they say a soldier is "switched on", and what kind of character traits are the elite units looking for?  I would imagine, professionalism, dedication and maturity are key, but what other traits would a Reserve Soldier be able to work on to improve one's soldiering ability, as well as the chance of making it through selection if one were so inclined to try out?!

You may be surprised to hear that, occasionally, those traits which describe a good soldier, are not necessarily the same as those of a good Assaulter. Assaulters tend to be those guys who were the captains of their hockey team, the "jocks", and guys who are just generally good at whatever they do. There are several personality traits that make those guys what they are, and which no one on this site can or would possibly be able to discuss.

But a 'good soldier'. Many of us have an accurate description of what one is. There is also several great soldiers on this site. But there is not one single answer to your question. It is all a matter of perspective.

 

[Greymatters]

But there is not one single answer to your question. It is all a matter of perspective.

I think the past three pages have demonstrated that amply... nice summary!

 

[sigtech]

You may be surprised to hear that, occasionally, those traits which describe a good soldier, are not necessarily the same as those of a good Assaulter. Assaulters tend to be those guys who were the captains of their hockey team, the "jocks", and guys who are just generally good at whatever they do. There are several personality traits that make those guys what they are, and which no one on this site can or would possibly be able to discuss.

But a 'good soldier'. Many of us have an accurate description of what one is. There is also several great soldiers on this site. But there is not one single answer to your question. It is all a matter of perspective.

Good way of putting about what it takes to be a good Assaulter, mite want to add slightly left of center. Assaulters are defiantly not cut from the same cloth that most good soldiers are, they are there own breed. It is men/women like those in the JTF that are willing to go where most don't want to go and if ordered to would probally look at the person given the order and say " are you nuts"

 

[geo]

Ummm... many great field soldiers find themselves in the dog house once they get back into garrison...

 

[RiverDriver]

Flexibility: Responsive to change and adaptable.

 

[sigtech]

Follows Orders , understands policy and procedure yet is able to be flexable within the constraints placed upon us.