Mac, The Troops are Welfare Whores, claims that he did 10 years in the U.S. military.
The reality?
Two of his main arguments makes me wonder about his military service. First, he immediately supports an argument about a civilian militia "defeating" a standing army. Second, he insisted that the United States would resort to nuclear warfare first in response to an invasion.
Now, when I showed him about how wrong he was, he back peddled from that argument. He later argued that "nobody would know" what the government would do.
The vast majority of your military personnel, and veterans, with experience in line units, would disagree with both of those arguments. Our training scenarios involve us doing conventional training, and conventional battle scenarios.
When we did train a "nuclear scenario," it generally was an exercise where conventional means to do the problem were done first. This is consistent with the US government's policy for the use of nuclear weapons... a policy that the vast majority of the people that served in the military would know.
Does this mean that he didn't serve?
I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one for the sake of argument. His philosophy, and the way he deals with disagreement suggests that if he did serve, he was a substandard performer... one who pissed people off the moment he opened his mouth.
He claims to have done 10 years. That amount of time is the halfway point to the coveted "20 year mark." Once you get that on the active duty side, or 20 good years on the reserve side, you become eligible to retire.
Whether active or reserve, most service members, at the 10 year mark generally think, "I got this far, I'm halfway through, I'm going for the '20'!" Normally, if they don't do that, or don't come back in to complete that time, there's something non-flattering in the background.
So, why didn't Mac, "The Troops are Welfare Whores," continue on till 20? Well, it's NOT for the reason he'd like to roll out.
Given his lack of knowledge on basic military tactical procedures... as well as his lack of knowledge on basic military strategic procedures... I'm guessing that "Mac" was a substandard performer. That's the most lenient way for me to look at this.
The worst case scenario is that he had an attitude in addition to him being substandard. His commander may have put a bar to re-enlistment on him. Or, he could've been whacked by a quality review board, or a retention review board.
If commentaries, about Mac's weight are true, Mac, "The Troops are Welfare Whores," could've been kicked out for being a fat boy program failure. But, absent his photos, I'm going to assume that this wasn't the case.
Now, I did say that the vast majority of us, in the military community, understand certain things. The vast majority of us like to argue from the facts... something that Mac isn't doing on "The Troops are Welfare Whores" group page.
Researching the facts, and arguing from the facts, is something that we're trained to do. That training carries itself with us beyond the military.
There are a minority of service members who are like Mac. They're usually the substandard performers, the people that are identified as "that guy," "that gal," that "problem child," etc. Mac's demeanor on his page suggests that he had a hard time getting along with others in the military.
These are usually the folks that blame events, things, or others, for their own shortcomings. Consequently, they don't grow as a person or professionally.
Instead of seeing his own flaws, and thus moving forward with his career, he probably blamed "the man," his officers, his NCOICs, his fellow service members, or others, for his failures and his poor standing in his unit.
His commentary does read like he has a "vendetta" against the military for its "perceived" transgressions against him.
The reality?
Two of his main arguments makes me wonder about his military service. First, he immediately supports an argument about a civilian militia "defeating" a standing army. Second, he insisted that the United States would resort to nuclear warfare first in response to an invasion.
Now, when I showed him about how wrong he was, he back peddled from that argument. He later argued that "nobody would know" what the government would do.
The vast majority of your military personnel, and veterans, with experience in line units, would disagree with both of those arguments. Our training scenarios involve us doing conventional training, and conventional battle scenarios.
When we did train a "nuclear scenario," it generally was an exercise where conventional means to do the problem were done first. This is consistent with the US government's policy for the use of nuclear weapons... a policy that the vast majority of the people that served in the military would know.
Does this mean that he didn't serve?
I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one for the sake of argument. His philosophy, and the way he deals with disagreement suggests that if he did serve, he was a substandard performer... one who pissed people off the moment he opened his mouth.
He claims to have done 10 years. That amount of time is the halfway point to the coveted "20 year mark." Once you get that on the active duty side, or 20 good years on the reserve side, you become eligible to retire.
Whether active or reserve, most service members, at the 10 year mark generally think, "I got this far, I'm halfway through, I'm going for the '20'!" Normally, if they don't do that, or don't come back in to complete that time, there's something non-flattering in the background.
So, why didn't Mac, "The Troops are Welfare Whores," continue on till 20? Well, it's NOT for the reason he'd like to roll out.
Given his lack of knowledge on basic military tactical procedures... as well as his lack of knowledge on basic military strategic procedures... I'm guessing that "Mac" was a substandard performer. That's the most lenient way for me to look at this.
The worst case scenario is that he had an attitude in addition to him being substandard. His commander may have put a bar to re-enlistment on him. Or, he could've been whacked by a quality review board, or a retention review board.
If commentaries, about Mac's weight are true, Mac, "The Troops are Welfare Whores," could've been kicked out for being a fat boy program failure. But, absent his photos, I'm going to assume that this wasn't the case.
Now, I did say that the vast majority of us, in the military community, understand certain things. The vast majority of us like to argue from the facts... something that Mac isn't doing on "The Troops are Welfare Whores" group page.
Researching the facts, and arguing from the facts, is something that we're trained to do. That training carries itself with us beyond the military.
There are a minority of service members who are like Mac. They're usually the substandard performers, the people that are identified as "that guy," "that gal," that "problem child," etc. Mac's demeanor on his page suggests that he had a hard time getting along with others in the military.
These are usually the folks that blame events, things, or others, for their own shortcomings. Consequently, they don't grow as a person or professionally.
Instead of seeing his own flaws, and thus moving forward with his career, he probably blamed "the man," his officers, his NCOICs, his fellow service members, or others, for his failures and his poor standing in his unit.
His commentary does read like he has a "vendetta" against the military for its "perceived" transgressions against him.
1 comment:
Mr Mac is Steven McDuffie. Check out his train ride photo to the bakken oil fields or his run for congress in Colorado. Real gem.
Post a Comment