U.S. Politics

Damien said:
Interestingly, the main argument I've seen against the word isn't that it's performatively macho, but that it's actually incredibly reductive and dishonest, since most of what the military does is not actually fighting wars.
Click to expand...
Yes that too.

I just . . . if someone came up to me and said “I’m a warfighter”, I’d instantly double over on guffaws. I wouldn’t be able to help it. It’s like if I insisted on saying “I’m a stage taker” instead of an actor or “I’m a mind dissector” instead of a counselor. Or like “I’m wearing slain animals on my body” instead of “this is a leather jacket”.

Does “military personnel” not cover it adequately?
 
AceofKnaves said:
Yes that too.

I just . . . if someone came up to me and said “I’m a warfighter”, I’d instantly double over on guffaws. I wouldn’t be able to help it. It’s like if I insisted on saying “I’m a stage taker” instead of an actor or “I’m a mind dissector” instead of a counselor. Or like “I’m wear slain animals on my body” instead of “this is a leather jacket”.
Click to expand...
Haha.. 100%. That's another complaint about it; it's just stupid. It sounds stupid to anyone above a 5th grade education. But I mean, I kind of have that problem with lots of words we use; don't get me started on 'washing machine.' How fucking lazy are we?

To be fair, though, it's not a self-descriptor. I think that's why it's so weird to hear a person say it out loud like Hegseth did in the context he used it. It's more of an internal thing. I can't imagine anyone ever saying 'I'm a warfighter.' Just beyond how stupid it sounds, most people in the military are at least somewhat proud of their branch and would say they're a marine, or an airman, or whatever.

That being said, I have no idea if they're still looking for a new word of if the DOD has just settled on that one and everyone is just stuck with it. It is somewhat fitting for the likes of Hegseth and Trump to refer to their military people as 'warfighters.' Or maybe 'shooty guys.'
 
AceofKnaves said:
Honestly this would be easier for me to swallow; at least it acknowledges the infantilism of it all.
🤣
Click to expand...
I just see Trump and Hegseth, totally big important man serious faces, leaning over a tactical map. Dramatic music in the background.
Trump: We cannot allow them to get to our positions. We'll need to put our shooty guys right here. ~stabbing a finger at the map~
Hegseth: Sir, they'll be wiped out. They have no armored support. We can't sacrifice our warfighters like this. I just got them all sweet new vests with like.. wolves on them. Because they're lone wolves. All of them. Like a pack of lone fuckin' wolves, sir.
Trump: ~placing hand on Hegseth's shoulder~ They can do this, Pete. I just got special force fields for all the shooty guys. If someone pow-pows at them, they just go nuh-uh because of the force field and they don't die. But they also have the super bullets so they can shoot other shooty guys that have force fields.
Hegseth: You're a genius, sir. I think I might be in love with you. If I were lucky enough to be a woman that you sexually assaulted, I would be proud to carry your babies.
Trump: They'd be stupid. Like Eric. But no one would be able to shoot them. Because of the force field.
 
I just want the moment where Trump is the twerpy traitor from The Last Starfighter and looks over at Hegseth and says “what do we do now?” And Hegseth, as the alien dude with the weird cyber-monocle, goes “WE DIE”.
*BOOM*
 
Damien said:
ONLY the Army are technically soldiers. Only Navy have marines. So it's not right to address all people in the military as 'soldiers,' as that disrespects basically all branches of the military that aren't 'the Army.' So.... 'Warfighter' was the term they settled on to try to find this unicorn word that can encompass not only all branches of service, but also encompassed support, non-combat roles by pointing out that those people do still fight wars, even if they're not shooting the enemy.
Click to expand...

Quite correct. In the Navy, we were called Sailors. The jarheads ... heh, sorry, ... the Marines were called just that. Marines. Except in a barfight when they were called jarheads. The Air Force were referred to as Airman. I forgot what we used to call the Coast Guard. "Puddle Jumpers" was what the Navy called them but that wasn't their official name. Women in the Navy were called WAVES. For a short time they were called WINS (Acronym for "Women in the Navy") but I don't think that name stuck.

Interestingly, the main argument I've seen against the word isn't that it's performatively macho, but that it's actually incredibly reductive and dishonest, since most of what the military does is not actually fighting wars.
Click to expand...

Again, quite correct. I was trained to use a rifle and a handgun in boot camp. After I graduated, I never picked up a gun again.

My first duty station was Naval Support Force Antarctica, which was headquartered on the Sea Bee base in Port Huneme, California. Our mission was to support the civilian scientists in their research efforts on that continent. We basically provided them with everything they needed. Transportation, food, gear, clothing, fuel and everything else. I was there for three years and made three deployments. I loved working with the scientists. I thought what they did was fascinating and my young twenty something self learned a lot. Our funding came from the National Science Foundation and the United States Antarctic Research Program, NOT the Department of Defense.

I also got to see Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Hawaii. I made friends there that I still keep in touch with this to day.

I'm proud of my military service. I'm so glad I joined. I saw some incredible and wondrous sights and met some amazing people.

So yes, we wore many hats. I never thought of myself as a "warfighter" and never will.
 
SDcomics said:
My first duty station was Naval Support Force Antarctica, which was headquartered on the Sea Bee base in Port Huneme, California. Our mission was to support the civilian scientists in their research efforts on that continent. We basically provided them with everything they needed. Transportation, food, gear, clothing, fuel and everything else. I was there for three years and made three deployments. I loved working with the scientists. I thought what they did was fascinating and my young twenty something self learned a lot. Our funding came from the National Science Foundation and the United States Antarctic Research Program, NOT the Department of Defense.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a hell of a cool way to spend your time there.
 
docsilence said:
That sounds like a hell of a cool way to spend your time there.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was cool for sure. There were Japanese, Russian and French research bases nearby and that was quite an eye opener for this kid. Bear in mind I was raised on a farm in rural Indiana. Six months after I left there, I was learning about Shinto and Buddhist philosophies, classic Russian composers (I still love you, Tchaikovsky) and fine French cuisine with it's meticulous cooking techniques.

I got a world class education in the Navy, and when I say "world" class, I mean WORLD CLASS. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top