Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I've always found this stuff fascinating.
1 posted on 07/15/2006 2:31:06 PM PDT by Axhandle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Axhandle

Having spent considerable time with officers from all services, I have noticed the following:
-- Marine officers seems to be the most selfless and pragmatic; they exemplify the can-do team player. They focus on getting the job done, are respectful, and will listen to you (whoever you are) if you ideas make sense. If I were choosing a team, I'd pick marines to be on it.
-- Air Force officers are the most civilianized. In fact, many of them come off as civilians who just happen to wear a blue suit. Like the Marines, they are easy to work with and tend not be full of themselves. They also tend to be more flexible and open to new thinking than the other services. In many was, the Army and AF are polar opposites.
-- The Army officers tend to be suprisingly intelligent. Many times, the Army officers are actually brighter than those from other services (something I didn't expect). On the flip side, they tend to be arrogant, very rank conscious, and rigid in their thinking. They will also never ask for help--this is (apparently) considered to be a badge of shame. Lastly, they will always give tons of responsibility to the Army guy to build them up--sometimes more than they can handle. If you are an AF officer in an Army-run org, you will always get the short end of the stick.
Navy -- Naval officers tend to be full of themselves and tough to work with. You always hear them use the term "naval officer" with reverence. They definitely consider themselves to be better than the other services. And they are better--at scheming. They are also able to produce surprisingly good results. In fact, it is kind of a paradox. Personally, I wouldn't give a wad of spit for some of the naval officers I've met. Yet, at the end of the day, you have to admit they do a heck of a job. Methinks it is because the Navy is better at skirt bureaucracy than the other services when it stands in the way of getting the job done. [This is the definitely not true of either the AF or Army].


2 posted on 07/15/2006 4:04:07 PM PDT by rbg81 (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Axhandle
We all enjoy making fun of the other services, and I am no exception. But, before all of this begins, I think it is useful to remember that the U.S. Army and the USMC have not been attacked by an enemy aircraft since the Korean War. This is not an accident. Our nation has spent a fortune ensuring that we have total command of the skies and those who wear wings have a right to be proud of their contributions to that effort.

But, the Air Force are a strange bunch. When they redesigned their uniforms to look more like Delta and United, I started to get a little suspicious. Their recent experiences raise even more eyebrows. The article quotes AFA cadets as saying:

the difference between the Air Force and the Army was that in the Army, the officers send the enlisted soldiers out to fight, while in the Air Force, the enlisted folks stay behind and send the officers out to do the fighting.

Again, the USAF is a victim of its own success. Pilots are not fighting and they are not dying, they are just boring holes through the sky. The dying in the Air Force is now done by the young enlisted airmen who accompany the Army and Special Operations Forces. This must be driving the zoomies crazy.

My father-in-law was a command pilot in B-24's and B-17's of the 8th Air Force. He has never said it, but the 8th Air Force was the most dangerous place on all the battlefields of the Second World War, including places like Sicily, Omaha Beach, and the Hurtgen Forest where my Regiment shed its blood. I don't think that he has much in common with the USAF of today.

They are pretty, though.

3 posted on 07/15/2006 4:26:25 PM PDT by centurion316 (Democrats - Al Qaida's Best Friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Axhandle
Man, don't know the writer, but wondered if he was writing about the US Air Force and US Army. As an ex USAF SNOC, I got to see both sides of USAF and ARMY.

I don't believe either service (USAF or ARMY) would be worth a crud at a new joint forces (like the Canadians) services. If that is to be the case, eliminate the USAF and Army budgets and give the cash to the Marines.

They operate as a 'joint forces' service with ground, sea and air forces combined and seem to do it very well.

When working wirh military folk from Canada, they struck me as being pretty much just another Govt employee......
6 posted on 07/15/2006 5:14:19 PM PDT by ASOC (The phrase "What if" or "If only" are for children.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson