The Vietnam War was a tough time in American history. The country was divided over the conflict, and protesters spoke out against the government in all sorts of ways.
Many veterans of the conflict returned home and were forgotten. But in the 1980s, a raft of new movies about the conflict hit the silver screen. One of the most successful was Oliver Stone’s “Platoon.”
While it made a huge impact at the time, did you ever wonder what happened to the brave soldiers from Platoon?
Well, we looked into it, and here’s what we found.
This young and naive kid who gave up a bright future in college to join the Army infantry had an interesting time after the war. He had some trouble with the law, his vision went to sh*t, and he changed his name to Ricky “Wild Thing” Vaughn. But he also learned that he could throw a mean fastball.
After getting out of jail for grand theft auto, Vaughn made the Cleveland Indians baseball team and helped win them a pennant.
Due to his overwhelming popularity, Vaughn turned to partying and excessive drinking. He checked himself into rehab and stayed for so long, he left as a certified anger management therapist.
Now, everyone thinks that Sgt. Elias was killed when he gunned down in the Vietnam jungle — not true. That was just a government cover-up for a secret experiment he doing.
Elias’ real name is Norman Osbourne. Yes, the founder of Oscorp. He was testing a chemical that could turn humans into superhumans. Once the first round of human testing was possible, he quickly faked his death before heading to New York.
Unfortunately, the testing didn’t go as planned and he turned himself into freakish Green Goblin.
Sadly, he attempted to take down one of the many superheroes who protect The Big Apple, and he met his doom.
All this tired soldier wanted to do was take some much-needed RR to avoid a massive third act firefight. Well, O’Neill eventually made it back to the states after seeing fierce combat in the Vietnam jungle.
He decided the Army wasn’t for him anymore and was discharged. O’Neill became a sports writer but got beaten up by an Italian football coach during an interview.
After collecting an undisclosed monetary settlement, O’Neill curled his hair and went on to become an Internal Medicine doctor at Sacred Heart Hospital.
He changed his name to Perry Cox and was placed in charge of all the medical residents.
The frustration he feels every day causes him to get nasty bloody noses which he treats with shock therapy.
Soon after Chris shot him in the chest, combat medics arrived on the scene and patched Barnes up in time. After a few years of therapeutic healing and some facial plastic surgery, Barnes made a full recovery.
His recovery was considered nothing short of a miracle, and he managed to fulfill a lifetime dream of becoming a major league baseball catcher.
He eventually made amends with “Wild Thing” after informing him that Elias was actually a crazy f*cker. The two played alongside one another for a few seasons before Barnes became the ball club’s manager.
In the offseason, Barnes moonlights as a Marine Corps sniper and travels deep into enemy territory taking out high valued targets.
But don’t tell anyone we said that — Op Sec and all.
When thinking about 18th and 19th century weaponry, the standard perception is of cumbersome muskets loaded standing up and only the skilled and lucky getting off as many as three rounds in a minute. But an innovative air-powered semi-automatic rifle developed by an Austrian watchmaker in 1779 or 1780 served several armies for decades, and even played a role in the Lewis and Clark Expedition.
Bartholomaus Girandoni, an watchmaker from the Austrian Empire province of Tyrol, had developed an innovative form of firearm, especially for the technological limitations of the time. A pressurized container of air, in the form of a removable stock, would propel a .46 calibre musket ball at speeds comparable to modern day handguns. A tube magazine, typically holding more than 20 rounds, fed through a manual switch.
The weapon was pointed upward and a switch was pressed to reload. Considering that standard muskets at the time required the operator to be standing while reloading, this let soldiers keep low to the ground, presenting a much smaller target and allowing them to stay under cover. It was comparable in range, accuracy, and penetration to a standard musket.
A soldier armed with the rifle typically carried three air tanks and a hundred lead shot in a special leather case.The air canister was good for perhaps 30-40 effective shots, with range and accuracy dropping as the pressure went down. An additional benefit was that it was much quieter than gunpowder based weapons.
A semi-automatic weapon of this level of effectiveness was basically unknown, and the Austrian Army eagerly adopted the design. It saw extensive action in the Napoleonic Wars, and was used for over 30 years.
Thomas Jefferson, who always had a keen interest in inventive new technology, purchased several of the rifles. One of them was carried by the legendary Lewis and Clark expedition, whom demonstrated the rifle to American Indian tribes they met along the way. The Indians were impressed with the weapon’s firepower and it’s much quieter report than a standard musket.
But the weapon had a number of disadvantages. Recharging a canister could take over 1,500 cranks from a small hand pump, though larger horse drawn recharge stations were often used. The weapon was complex and easily damaged, and the leather seals connecting the tank to the gun had to be kept wet in order to prevent leaks. Compared to the relative simplicity of regular muskets, it required a lot of training to maintain and suffered from serious reliability issues.
The weapon was simply too complex for the technology at the time, and in mass production suffered from too many defects and expense. The conscript armies of the period needed simple weapons that could be built and maintained anywhere, and it was never widely adopted by other European armies.
Though it was phased out by 1815, the weapon’s technology was unique, and an infantry weapon of similar capabilities in sustained rapid fire were not seen again for 50 years. In the end, it’s real flaw is that it was ahead of it’s time.
This new Navy tech aims to use lasers to fool air defense systems and missiles into thinking they see multiple aircraft or even a UAP for that matter–but the plan wasn’t to trick the world into thinking they were being visited by aliens.
America uses stealth technology not just to avoid detection, but to avoid being shot down after they’ve been detected. A recent patent filed by the U.S. Navy meant to increase the survivability of stealth aircraft might do just that, but if the system works the way it’s supposed to, it could just as easily be used to project images into the sky that would look and act a whole lot like the strange crafts depicted in UAP footage released by the U.S. military in recent years.
How can Navy tech be responsible for UAP sightings?
When talking military aviation, it’s not uncommon for many to think of “stealth” as a singular technology utilized to help advanced aircraft defeat detection. The truth, of course, is a lot more complicated than that. Stealth might be more accurately described as an approach to warfare, rather than a specific piece of gear. In order to leverage a stealth aircraft effectively, pains must be taken to limit the platform’s radar cross-section (from multiple angles), its infrared detectability (the amount of heat it releases), and to create a mission flight plan that keeps the aircraft operating to its advantage, rather than its detriment.
The truth is, many of America’s most advanced stealth aircraft aren’t actually invisible to radar detection at all. The intent behind stealth isn’t truly to go entirely unnoticed in many instances, but instead, to prevent an opponent from being able to effectively engage and shoot down your aircraft. To that end, even “stealth” platforms like the F-22 Raptor can actually be spotted on radar using lower frequency bands. Radar systems leveraged in this way can spot sneaky intruders, but they’re not good for establishing a weapon’s grade lock on anything. In other words, lower-frequency radar bands can be used to see stealth planes coming, but can’t be used to shoot them down.
However, coupling these sorts of radar systems with other forms of air defenses can make for a real threat for stealth aircraft. “Heat-seeking” missiles, which have been around since the 1950s and don’t rely on radar to engage targets effectively sniff out encroaching aircraft by following the infrared signature of the super-heated exhaust exiting the back of the jet. While design elements have been incorporated into stealth aircraft aimed at mitigating these infrared signatures, only so much can be done to hide the heat released by the chemical explosions we use to propel our combat aircraft.
So, even if America’s stealth planes were completely invisible to radar (which they aren’t), they still need to worry about infrared-driven missiles fired in their general direction either as a result of visual detection or low-band radar systems. Pilots go to great lengths to plan out their sorties prior to getting airborne to leverage their stealth aircraft most effectively. Limiting exposure to advanced air defense systems, operating at night to avoid visual detection, and employing strategies regarding altitude and angle of attack all play a role in maintaining a “stealth” profile.
In the event a “heat-seeking” missile does find its way onto the trail of a stealth fighter like the F-22, the aircraft has the ability to deploy flares in an attempt to confuse the infrared-led ordnance. But flares offer an extremely limited form of protection in heavily contested airspace. Because of this, the general rule of thumb on combat sorties is simple: try to avoid situations where the enemy can lob missiles at you, and your chances of success increase dramatically.
However, in a large scale conflict against a technologically capable foe like China or (to a lesser extent) Russia, America’s stealth aircraft would face challenges unlike any they have in modern warfare, as our fleets of sneaky fighters and bombers came up against some of the most advanced air defense systems currently employed anywhere on the planet. In such a war, losses would be all but certain, and while America may employ more stealth aircraft than any other nation, our total numbers remain in the hundreds. So each stealth aircraft lost would truly be felt.
But new technology under patent by the U.S. Navy could shift the odds even further into the favor of stealth aircraft: leveraging lasers to produce plasma bursts that could trick inbound missiles into thinking they’ve found a jet to chase that would actually be little more than a hologram.
This technology has already been used to create laser-plasma balls that can transmit human speech. I’m going to be honest with you here, that sentence is as hard to wrap my head around as the writer as it probably is for you to grasp as a reader. Talking plasma balls?
Here’s a video from our friends at Military Times running down this cutting edge plasma technology:
Other applications for this laser system include use as a non-lethal weapon and even as a continuous flashbang grenade that could keep opponents in an area disoriented and unable to respond.
So, how does the Navy intend to leverage this sort of technology to make stealth aircraft even harder to hit? According to their patent, the laser system could be installed on the tail of an aircraft, and upon detection of an inbound missile, could literally project an infrared signature that would be comparable to a moving fighter jet’s exhaust out away from the fighter itself. Multiple systems could literally project multiple aircraft, leaving inbound missiles to go after the decoy plasma “fighters” instead of the actual aircraft itself.
These “laser-induced plasma filaments,” as researchers call them, can be projected up to hundreds of meters, depending on the laser system employed, and (here’s the part that’ll really blow your mind) can be used to emit any wavelength of light. That means these systems could effectively display infrared to fool inbound heat-seeking missiles, ultraviolet, or even visible light. Of course, it’s unlikely that the system could be used to mimic the visual cues of an actual aircraft, but it is possible to produce visible barriers between the weapon operator and the stealth aircraft emitting the laser.
This system could be deployed instantly, reused throughout a mission, and can stay at a desired altitude or location in mid-air; all things flares can’t do. With enough aircraft equipped with these systems (or enough systems equipped on a single aircraft) this method could be used to do far more than just protect jets. In the future, this approach could become a part of a missile defense system employed by Navy ships, carrier strike groups, or even entire cities.
“If you have a very short pulse you can generate a filament, and in the air that can propagate for hundreds of meters, and maybe with the next generation of lasers you could produce a filament of even a mile,” Alexandru Hening, a lead researcher on the patent, told IT magazine in 2017.
It’s likely that we won’t see this technology lighting up the airspace over combat zones any time soon, as there may well be years of research and development left before it finds its way into operational use. However, some have already begun scratching their heads regarding what it appears these laser-induced plasma filaments can do, and how that could explain the unusual behavior recorded in recently acknowledged Navy footage of unidentified aircraft being tracked on FLIR cameras by F/A-18 Super Hornet pilots.
It seems feasible that this technology could be used to fake just such a UFO or UAP sighting… but then, the earliest of these videos was produced in 2004, which would suggest far more advanced laser systems than the United States currently maintains were already in use some 17 years ago.
Could lasers have been used to fake UAP sightings? It seems feasible, but for now, the military’s focus seems set squarely on defensive applications for the patent.
Want to read more about groundbreaking patents filed by the U.S. Navy in recent years?
US troops fighting in the coalition against ISIS came under direct attack near Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army soldiers in Northern Syria.
Eric Pahon, a Pentagon spokesman told Business Insider that “unknown groups” have engaged with US forces on “multiple occasions over the past week or so Northwest of Manbij,” a town in Syria formerly held by ISIS.
“Our forces did receive fire and return fire and then moved to a secure location,” US Army Col. Ryan Dillon told Reuters. “The coalition has told Turkey to tell the rebels it backs there that firing on US-led coalition forces is not acceptable.”
The US supports several Syrian militias that also oppose Assad, though the US now only supports them in their fight against ISIS. However it seems that the Turkish-allied forces likely knew they were exchanging fire with US soldiers.
“These patrols are overt. Our forces are clearly marked and we have been operating in that area for some time,” said Dillon. “It should not be news to anyone that we are doing this, operating in that particular area.”
“We’re there to monitor and to deter hostilities and make sure everyone remains focused on ISIS,” said Pahon. “We’re going to have to continue our patrols but we have had to move to some protected positions.”
The Syrian government has asked Iran to take over the supervision and payroll of thousands of Shi’ite militiamen fighting alongside Russian and Syrian troops in support of President Bashar al-Assad, according to a government source and a news report.
The pro-opposition Syrian news website Zaman Al Wasel reported that it obtained a Syrian defense ministry document saying the Assad regime has approved a plan to give Iran responsibility for paying foreign fighters – mostly Shi’ites of varying nationalities. Shi’ite fighters mostly are paid in cash from Iran, the Syrian government and coffers of the Lebanese-based, pro-Iranian Hezbollah, according to analysts.
Iran would foot the bill alone in the future, a Syrian official told VOA on the condition of anonymity, confirming the Al Wasel report.
“The number of Shia militia has increased dramatically during the last two months,” the official said. “While a big part of these militia were recruited by Iran, a relatively big part was recruited by the Syrian government directly. We are speaking about more than 50,000 militants from different nationalities. The Syrian government requested that Iran provide for all of the mentioned militias.”
The document from Al Wasel put the number of fighters to be paid at 88,733 — a figure analysts say is exaggerated. They estimate that about 10,000 Iranian combat troops are in Syria fighting alongside thousands of fighters from Lebanon’s Tehran-affiliated Shiite militia Hezbollah and assorted Shiite militia made up of renegade Pakistanis, central Asians and other nationalities. Since January 2013, more than 1,000 members of Iran’s elite Quds Force or other elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) units have been killed fighting in Syria.
Tehran says its forces are in Syria to protect the Zeinab Shrine in Damascus, a Shi’ite holy site. But since 2011, Iran has been a major backer of the Syrian regime in its war with rebel groups across the country, at first sending advisers, then forces from the IRGC and expanding far beyond the shrine area.
Iran has long expressed a desire to command a unified army in the region, particularly in Syria, and its growing power in Syria and Iraq is causing unease in Western capitals. In an interview with the Mashregh news agency last August, Mohammad Ali Falaki, an IRGC leader, announced formation of a unified army in Syria which appears to have come to loose fruition.
“It would hardly be abnormal for Iran’s IRGC to be controlling yet more Shia jihadists,” said Talha Abdulrazaq, a researcher at the University of Exeter’s Strategy and Security Institute.
In the long run, the formation of a unified army in Syria under Tehran supervision appears very practical, analysts say.
“It seems plausible that the Syrian government shift the responsibility for management and organization of the militias, especially where financial burden is concerned,” said Rasool Nafisi, a Middle East affairs expert in Washington.
Asserting its military prowess would help Iran push its political agenda in the region, some analysts believe.
“The bigger and more advanced army you control, the stronger voice you have,” said Daryoush Babak, a Washington-based retired Iranian military adviser.
But unifying Assad supporters under Tehran’s umbrella could worsen sectarian conflict in the region between Shi’ites and Sunni, analysts say.
Iran is looking for any chance to increase its influence and gain an upper hand against Saudi Arabia, its strongest rival in the war of minds and hearts, analysts say. Saudi Arabia and Iran support rival groups in Syria’s civil war. And In a speech in Saudi Arabia, President Donald Trump accused Tehran of contributing to instability in the region.
“Tehran and Riyadh … keep contradicting each other to prove whose ideology leads the region,” said Nafisi.
While Syria has relied on Iran militarily in the fight against rebels and Islamic State, it’s unlikely to grant Tehran a controlling foothold in the country, analysts say.
“In Syria, it is not likely to happen as long as the Assad regime harbors ambitions of regaining sovereignty rather than being reduced to an Iranian protectorate,” said Alfoneh.
Staging aircraft carriers offshore or using drones from far away can be great assets in modern warfare. However, sometimes it’s necessary to go back to the basics when responding to a global crisis.
Exercise Swift Response 16, a month-long operation led by US forces, was conducted to keep up with traditional and newer methods of combat. Over 5,000 troops from nations such as France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy took part in this massive airborne exercise to conduct a rapid-response, joint forcible-entry scenario. While working with their European allies, US forces also participated in notable scenarios, such as staging a base within 18 hours of notification.
Here are several pictures of the multinational airborne exercise:
US Army and Italian paratroopers board a US Air Force C-130J Hercules during exercise Swift Response 16, at Ramstein Air Base, Germany.
A C-130J Super Hercules aircraft from Dyess Air Force Base, Texas, takes off for Germany within several hours’ worth of notice.
British paratroopers conduct a static-line jump.
Dutch Army paratroopers jump into Bunker Drop Zone at Grafenwoehr, Germany.
A US paratrooper with the 82nd Airborne Division lands with his parachute.
A French soldier watches soldiers descend from a Lockheed C-130 Hercules.
US soldiers locate a target on a map.
Multinational soldiers move toward their target.
Multinational soldiers cut through the foliage.
Soldiers weren’t the only ones dropped from the sky. Here, a US soldier prepares to untie a vehicle that had landed in the drop zone.
A US paratrooper radios higher command while conducting defensive operations.
A Polish soldier provides security while conducting defensive planning operations.
Airplanes weren’t the only machines dominating the skies. Here, a United Kingdom Aerospatiale SA 330 Puma conducts an aerial-reconnaissance training mission.
A British Parachute Regiment soldier prepares to load a helicopter while conducting a simulated medical evacuation.
In any real-life war scenario, bridges will be critical to both defensive and offensive forces. Here, military tactical vehicles prepare to engage their targets.
A Polish soldier reloads his weapon while securing a bridge.
Bridges will be fought for, from above and below.
A British soldier provides security while conducting medical-evacuation simulations.
The US wasn’t the only country that brought out their toys. Here, German Bundeswehr soldiers provide security while conducting a mounted patrol.
A French paratrooper aims his antitank weapon at an enemy tank.
A US soldier from the legendary 82nd Airborne Division readies a 60 mm mortar system for a simulated-fire mission.
US soldiers of Chaos Company, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division prepare to move out with their Light Tactical All Terrain Vehicles.
The Army and Air Force once conducted an air-to-air combat experiment between jet fighters and attack helicopters. Called J-CATCH, or Joint Countering Attack Helicopter, it was not the first of its kind but the most conclusive using modern technology.
The results showed attack helicopters proved remarkably deadly when properly employed against fighter aircraft. And it wasn’t even close.
First conducted by the Army using MASH Sikorsky H-19s, airframes developed in the 40s and 50s, the modern J-CATCH test started in 1978, as the Soviet Union expanded their helicopter forces. Of special concern was the development of the Mil Mi-24 or Hind helicopter gunship. The four phase J-CATCH experiment started in earnest with the Army, Marines, and Air Force participating in simulations at NASA’s Langley labs.
The second phase was a field test, pitting three AH-1 Cobras and two OH-58 Scouts against a Red Team force of UH-1 Twin Hueys and CH-3E Sea King helicopters and developed many new helicopter air-to-air tactics and maneuvers designed to counter the Russian Hind.
Phase Three is where the fighters came in. The Air Force chose F-4, A-7, A-10, and F-15 fighter aircraft to counter whatever the Army could muster in the exercise. The F-4 and F-15 were front line fighters with anti-air roles while the A-7 and A-10 had air-to-ground missions.
For two weeks, the helicopters trounced the fighter aircraft. The fighter pilots in the test runs sometimes didn’t even know they were under attack or destroyed until the exercise’s daily debriefing. The Army pilots were so good, they had to be ordered to follow Air Force procedures and tell their fixed-wing targets they were under attack over the radio. This only increased the kill ratio, which by the end of the exercise, had risen to 5-to-1 in favor of the helicopters.
The fourth phase of the exercise saw the final outcome of the test: fighters should avoid helicopters at all costs, unless they have superiority of distance or altitude.
It’s perfectly fine to love the military and take pride in serving, but some go way above and beyond as “motards.”
While it’s not politically correct, the commonly-used term describes some people in the military that are so motivated, it annoys everyone around them. Stemming from “moto” — short for motivation — the term “is used to describe some overbearing [Marine or soldier] who [is] extremely loud and obnoxious all the time. He is so motivated even in the sh–tiest situations that everyone wants to kick him in the teeth,” according to Urban Dictionary’s hilarious description.
We all know at least one of these people. If any of the following sounds a little too familiar, then it just might be you.
1. You use the term “behoove” and you are dead serious about it.
It’s often sounded out, like “be-who-of-you,” which is actually not a thing. But you’d never know that, having listened to your first sergeant tell you it would “be-who-of-you to make sure you have a designated driver if you’re going to drink this weekend.” We get it, behoove is a real word. Doesn’t make it any better when you say it.
2. There’s an inspirational quote in your email signature block.
There’s no across-the-board standardized format in the military for what’s supposed to be in your email signature block, but most people put something along the lines of their name, rank, and phone number. Then there are others who want to jam in their email address (Why? We know your email address, you sent us a freaking email), an inspirational quote that gets an eye-roll from most recipients, and a two-page-long message saying the contents of the email are private. Thanks, we got it.
3. You speak in the third person.
They should really pass a law against this.
4. Your closet is filled with military t-shirts, including one that has your rank on it.
If you’re a young private or PFC and you are rocking that sweet military t-shirt showing the ladies your name is Tactical Tommy, we can let this one slide (only for your first six months in). But if you are out in public wearing a shirt with your rank on it, good Lord. Head on down to the Gap or something. We heard they have good sales.
5. When you hear a question, you repeat it back to the person, and then add, “was that your question?”
This may be a Marine Corps-centric thing. As part of the Corps’ formal instructor training, most learn the proper way to answer a question is to repeat it back word-for-word, ask “was that your question?” and then proceed to answer the question. This method is certainly good for a big room full of people so they all know what the question was, but not so good when you’re at the dinner table.
6. You have a “screaming eagle” haircut and actually think it looks good.
Bonus points if you have the infamous “horse shoe.” When you go to basic training, you get your head shaved as a way of saying goodbye to the old civilian you. Then over time, you “earn” back some of that hair as you move along in training. While you should keep your hair relatively short for regulation’s sake, that doesn’t mean you should have the military equivalent of a mohawk (or moto-hawk, if you will).
If you have any questions, please refer to the glorious flowing locks of “Chesty” Puller or Medal of Honor recipients John Basilone and Audie Murphy.
7. You’ve corrected someone on their civilian attire when you were off base.
You may think you’re maintaining good order and discipline at all times, but what you are really doing is being a dick. Instead of jumping on someone you don’t even know for a supposed civilian attire violation at the local gas station, how about you just let this one slide? We’re quite sure the apocalypse won’t happen as a result.
8. You actually think running with a gas mask on is fun.
We’re not saying running with a gas mask is a bad idea. Plenty of troops serving during the 2003 Iraq invasion would probably think being prepared physically to operate in that environment is a good thing. But running with a gas mask is not, nor will it ever, be fun.
9. You won’t ever put your hands in your pockets in civilian clothing and think people who do so are “nasty.”
Despite what you may have heard, pockets have incredible functionality, to include being able to hold keys, change, and ID cards. They can even keep hands warm! But perhaps most shockingly of all, putting your hands into the pockets of your jeans has no bearing on whether you are a good or bad soldier.
10. You require civilians to address you by your rank.
11. There is a giant vinyl sticker showing all the ribbons you’ve ever been awarded on the back window of your lifted pickup truck.
One of the tenets of selfless service is the thought that you serve without the expectation of recognition or gain. You know, modesty and all that good stuff they teach you at boot camp. No one cares that you have three Good Conduct Medals and they certainly don’t want to see it while they are sitting behind you in rush hour traffic.
And take off those idiotic “Truck Nutz” for Chrissakes.
12. As soon as you get promoted to NCO, you tell your best friends they need to address you by your rank.
You were literally a lance corporal with the rest of us 27 seconds ago. Get the hell out of here.
Being the new guy in a squad is just something every soldier has to go through. They work hard, prove themselves, and earn a little respect and rank as fast as they can. Until they do, junior soldiers put up with these 6 problems.
1. Crappy roommates
All enlisted soldiers start off with a random roommate in the barracks, but they get more say on roommates the longer they’re in the unit. If they get tight with the barracks noncommissioned officer, they may even have their own room.
The new guy to a unit has cultivated no relationships, and so can’t influence anyone. They are going to be roomed with whichever member of the squad is most disliked by the barracks NCO. This member is usually dirty, undisciplined, and annoying. Also, since the roommate is senior to the new guy, he can order the new guy around. Have fun in your new home, boot!
2. Literally everyone is in charge of them
There’s an Army saying, “If there are two privates on a hill, one of them is in charge.” It’s meant to illustrate that soldiers are never without leadership, but it also means that even the young soldiers in the squad can give the younger guy a legal order. And what about the youngest guy?
Well, he’s in charge of nothing and every squad member is in charge of him. If he screws up, he’s hearing about it from everyone in the squad.
3. No respect
Taking orders from everyone is bad enough, but the junior soldier doesn’t get any respect even though they do all the work. It makes sense. The squad has endured combat together. They’ve cleared buildings, fought for ground, and buried friends as a unit. Then this new guy comes along and wants to be part of the group? Nope. Gotta earn your camaraderie, noob.
4. Most dangerous positions and assignments
The junior-most members will get plenty of chances to prove themselves, since they’re often in the most dangerous positions. For the infantry, he’s likely to be the first one in the door on a clearing mission, and he’s more likely to be assigned as gunner in a vehicle on a movement.
For the POGs, the junior squad member is the one most likely to get tasked out on a mission. Commander needs someone to pull a guard shift at the gate? It’s not like Pvt. Snuffy has anything going on. Gunny wants a volunteer for convoy security? Pfc. Schmuckatelli better grab his gear.
5. They’re the canaries in the coal mine
The most dangerous time to be the junior member is when there is a chemical or biological attack. The military dons protective gear when it’s hit with biological or chemical agents, and troops don’t take the gear off until their best detection kits say the threat is gone. But, the kits can’t detect everything and someone has to take the first unprotected breath.
And that’s where the junior soldier comes in. The unit takes away their weapon and has them unmask for a short period. If they don’t show signs of trouble, the rest of the unit unmasks. If the soldier does start reacting to a chemical compound, the unit keeps their masks on and sends the junior guy to a hospital. Get well soon!
6. Long hours and low pay
No one in the military is getting rich, and just about everyone works long hours. But, the junior guys usually work the same hours for even less pay than everyone else. A new E-2 in the military makes $1734 a month. They work an eight-hour day plus do an hour of mandatory physical training every morning. So, not counting any assignments, overnight guard duty, or additional physical training, an E-2 makes about $8.67 an hour before taxes.
They may get great benefits and education incentives, but the paychecks can be depressing.
The U.S. Military Academy has unveiled its football uniforms for the 2016 Army-Navy game, and they’re awesome tributes to the All American paratroopers and glider troops of World War II.
The dark gray jerseys are adorned with patches, unit crests, and mottoes of regiments that fought within the 82nd “All American” Airborne Division during the invasions of Normandy, Italy, and Holland.
The 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment — sometimes known as the Red Devils — is one of the units honored by the new football jerseys. (Screenshot: YouTube/GoArmyWestPoint)
The U.S. Army began experimenting with Airborne operations in 1940 by forming a test platoon. Over the course of World War II, paratroopers and glider soldiers were asked to test and develop airborne tactics and equipment in combat, jumping behind enemy lines or onto the flanks of friendly units to disrupt attacks or quickly reinforce vulnerable elements.
The 82nd Airborne Division fought primarily against the Germans during the war, though they faced some Italian units during fighting in that country.
The 82nd Division is the only full airborne division left in the U.S. military. Most airborne forces have been deactivated since the peak of fighting in World War II. Other previously airborne units — most notably the 101st Airborne Division of “Band of Brothers” fame — have transitioned to other missions.
Mix one U.S. Marine with alcohol and throw in the possibility of a huge foam party and you get an alcohol-related incident on Kadena Air Base.
That’s according to Navy Times, which reported on Tuesday that Air Force officials were investigating how a drunk Marine entered an aircraft hangar on Kadena on May 23 and turned on the fire suppression system at around 1:45 a.m., releasing flame retardant foam close to at least one aircraft.
“The details of the incident are currently under investigation,” 2nd Lt. Erik Anthony told Stars and Stripes in an email. “Kadena’s capabilities and readiness have not suffered.”
The unnamed Marine was arrested shortly after the incident, but details on the Marine’s level of intoxication, his or her unit, or who made the arrest, were not released.
Reports of sexual assaults in the military increased slightly last year, U.S. defense officials said Monday, and more than half the victims reported negative reactions or retaliation for their complaints.
The defense officials, however, said an anonymous survey conducted last year showed some progress in fighting sexual assault, as fewer than 15,000 service members described themselves as victims of unwanted sexual contact. That is 4,000 fewer than in a 2014 survey. Sexual assault is a highly underreported crime, so the Pentagon uses anonymous surveys to track the problem.
The new figures are being released Monday. Several defense officials spoke about the report on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the data ahead of time.
For more than a decade, the Defense Department has been trying to encourage more people to report sexual assaults and harassment. The agency says greater reporting allows more victims to seek treatment.
Overall there were 6,172 reports of sexual assault filed in 2016, compared to 6,083 the previous year. The largest increase occurred in the Navy, with 5 percent more reports. There was a 3 percent jump in the Air Force. The Army and Marine Corps had slight decreases.
Retaliation is difficult to determine, and the Defense Department has been adjusting its measurements for several years. It seeks to differentiate between more serious workplace retribution and social snubs that, while upsetting, are not illegal.
Two years ago, a RAND Corporation study found that about 57 percent of sexual assault victims believed they faced retaliation from commanders or peers. Members of Congress demanded swift steps to protect whistleblowers, including sexual assault victims, who are wronged as a result of reports or complaints.
Data at the time suggested that many victims described the vengeful behavior as social backlash, including online snubs, that don’t meet the legal definition of retaliation.
Officials are trying to get a greater understanding about perceptions of retaliation. They’ve added more questions and analysis to eliminate instances when commanders make adjustments or transfer victims to protect them, as opposed to punishing them or pressuring them to drop criminal proceedings.
As a result, while 58 percent of victims last year said they faced some type of “negative behavior,” only 32 percent described circumstances that could legally be described as retribution. This includes professional retaliation, administration actions or punishments. In 2015, 38 percent reported such actions.
Despite the small increase in reports last year, officials focused on the anonymous survey. The survey is done every two years and includes a wider range of sexual contact.
In 2012, the survey showed 26,000 service members said they had been victims of unwanted sexual contact, which can range from inappropriate touching and hazing to rape. The numbers enraged Congress and triggered extensive debate over new laws and regulations to attack the problem.
The surveys have shown a steady decline. Monday’s report shows 14,900 cases were reported. Of those, 8,600 were women and 6,300 were men. It marks the first time more women than men said they experienced unwanted sexual contact. There are far more men in the military and the total number of male victims had been higher, even if by percentage, women faced more unwanted contact.
The decrease in reports by men suggests a possible reduction in hazing incidents, officials said.
About 21 percent of women said they had faced sexual harassment, about the same as two years ago. The percentage of men dipped a bit.
On Aug. 2, 1990, Iraqi tanks and infantry steamrolled across Kuwait in an invasion and occupation that took all of two days. The Iraqi dictator blamed Kuwait for slant drilling from Iraqi oil fields and claimed the Gulf state was actually an ancient province of Iraq. In reality, Saddam owed the Kuwaitis $14 billion from Iraq’s nearly 10-year war with Iran and Kuwaiti oil drilling was driving down the price of oil.
In response, the United States and a coalition of countries created a massive counteroffensive force in Saudi Arabia while giving Saddam an ultimatum to either leave Kuwait or face the coalition’s punishment. For some reason, he let the deadline lapse and was forcibly removed. Here are the top five reasons why he thought he could stick around:
1. Saddam thought the U.S. was okay with the invasion
Saddam supposedly thought the Kuwaitis were stealing oil and purposely producing more than OPEC standards in order to keep Iraqi revenues low. To keep tensions from rising, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie met with Saddam who told her he wanted Kuwait to agree to the OPEC standards. Under orders from the Bush administration, Glaspie told Saddam the U.S. had no opinion on the issue.
Saddam thought she was talking about the tensions between the two countries. Glaspie actually meant the OPEC production standards. So when Saddam went to war, he was actually surprised to get a condemnation from the United States.
2. Iraq was the world’s 5th-largest army
Iraq could legitimately boast a million men under arms in 1990. Even though the United States only considered a third of the army capable of fighting a real war, that’s still more than 300,000 troops he could use as an offensive force.
Having such a large ground force was not insignificant, especially not to American military planners. While a large army may make a difference when fighting Iran, it’s a whole other matter to fight an advanced Western army. Iraq’s air force was heavily overpowered in this regard and it had no navy to speak of.
3. Iraqi troops were combat veterans
No matter how many effective fighters Saddam had and no matter how many of them were conscripted into the Iraqi Army, they were still veterans of a brutal 10-year war with neighboring Iran. Any soldier will tell you there’s a very big difference between fighting troops that have been battle tested and troops that are as green as the uniform they’re wearing.
While Iraq didn’t necessarily win the Iran-Iraq War, it didn’t lose the war, either. The weapons he accumulated over the years to fight Iran could still be used against any other opponent. The U.S. knew what he had because we had the receipt.
4. Anti-Western sentiment was high in the Middle East
When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the Palestinians were fighting to shake off the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, a cause celebrated by most Arabs and Arab leaders in the region. Saddam even tried to frame his invasion of Kuwait as redrawing the lines of a map created by the British and righting a historical wrong.
When that didn’t work, Saddam tried portraying himself as a devout Muslim, praying in mosques and creating religious artwork of himself in prayer. That didn’t work either. Wahhabi clerics in Saudi Arabia still called him the “Enemy of God.”
5. Iraq had months to prepare for the Gulf War
Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait was finished by August 4, 1990. Saddam annexed Kuwait as Iraq’s 19th province by the end of the month. The President of the United States and the President of the Soviet Union both demanded Iraq leave Kuwait immediately. It wasn’t until November 29, 1990 that the United Nations passed a resolution threatening military action if Saddam didn’t leave.
All Saddam did in the meantime was send hundreds of thousands of troops into Kuwait to bolster the occupation forces there. He could have pressed his advantage and invaded Saudi Arabia before the Coalition could build up its troops and vehicles, but he didn’t. Only after there were hundreds of thousands of Coalition troops did he invade – and was quickly repulsed.