Keddrick Corday Thompson: Appreciate your perspective though...
No problem, I enjoy schooling you. :D
Keddrick Corday Thompson: You not schooling me...
If you go back and read our transaction, you will notice that I am schooling you. You are making inaccurate statements, and I'm providing you with the facts.
Let's take your "deployment patch" statement. You insist that it is the term that is being used. When I was infantry, we used "combat patch" to describe such a patch. However, according to AR 670-1, it's called a Shoulder Sleeve Insignia - Former Wartime Service" (SSI-FWS) patch. Not a "deployment" or "combat" patch.
There are numerous other examples above where you got things wrong and I corrected you. So, contrary to what you are arguing, I'm schooling you... And I'm enjoying it.
Keddrick Corday Thompson: you justifying. [PROJECTING YOUR TRAITS]
No, I'm not justifying anything. I'm simply telling you what is the case. However, you've been the one that attempted to justify things.
For example, your arguments as to why you should be "IRR"... Or why your unit should stand up a "Rear Detachment".
In both instances, your argument was more for your convenience rather than for supporting your unit's mission. Your unit does not appear to want to stand up a rear detachment. The arguments that you advanced, in favor of such a detachment, constitute a justification.
The energy that you spent justifying either an IRR or rear detachment? It could have been spent preparing yourself for the upcoming deployment. This falls under the "selfless service" category.
The main thrust of your argument was for your personal convenience. You tried to justify that.
Keddrick Corday Thompson: Like I said if you mobilization in states its not a deployment.
Not true. You have to understand that "mobilization" brings you from a "static" point to a "mobile" point. The process of mobilization brings you from the "TPU routine" to "movement capable". Once you complete the mobilization process and then move to where your unit is temporarily assigned, you are deployed.
You could insist that this is "not a deployment". Both the Army and Military Science disagree with your argument.
Keddrick Corday Thompson: I have friends that are like you that I can share textbook definitions and terms but there is no use. You not gone get it.
I have been debating against people online for a long time now. For years, almost 2 decades. I've lost count of how many times I've seen others play your tactics.
What's really happening with your statement? You're expressing frustration that I will stand my ground and continue to prove you wrong.
I can tell, by how you conducted yourself here, that you entered this interaction expecting me to not challenge your argument. You are used to getting your way. I see that with your conduct during this interaction. I see this with the justifications you make for why your unit "should" stand up a rear detachment.
When you said, "...and face to face I make things happen. Not my 1st rodeo... did it before...", One of the things you effectively told me was that you would push for things to go your way... Instead of doing what you are supposed to do. It shows that you're a "shammer".
Keddrick Corday Thompson: Because you a justify. [REPEAT POINT + PROJECTING YOUR TRAITS]
No, I'm not justifying anything. I'm simply telling you what is the case. However, you've been the one that attempted to justify things.
For example, the arguments as to why you should be "IRR", or why your unit should stand up a "Rear Detachment".
In both instances, your argument was more for convenience than it was for supporting your unit's mission. Your unit does not appear to want to stand up a rear detachment. The arguments that you advanced, in favor of such a detachment, constitute a justification.
The energy that you spent, justifying first the IRR, and then the rear detachment? You could've spent that time preparing yourself for the upcoming deployment. This falls under the "selfless service" category.
The main thrust of your desires, as expressed above, was for your personal convenience. Your argument was an attempt to justify that. You don't appear to be concerned about your unit. You're concerned about your own personal interest instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment