Grunt

Members
  • Posts

    3898
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

Posts posted by Grunt

  1. 20 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

    Since you followed up your "yes" with a view that seems to believe that stating that it's stupid to believe the earth is flat as a general statement on a forum is equivalently improper to telling someone they're stupid to their face, and exactly opposite to holding one's tongue when speaking face to face with a flat-earther, I am entirely unconvinced by your claim to recognize the difference.

    It's my observation that people who don't keep their covenants often think it's "mean and drives people from the church" when you talk about keeping your covenants.

  2. 11 hours ago, laronius said:

    Say what you will about Trump, he does indeed have many distasteful qualities. But at the end of the day the left promotes policies that are far more destructive of the family, society and the Constitution. Some of which are flat out EVIL. I personally cannot justify voting for that.

    There are no good options right now (at least not viable ones) so we just have to decide, policy wise, what matters most. If we can't have it all, what is at the top of the list? For me there are a few deal maker/breakers, including:

    They must support religious freedoms.

    They must not support elective abortions.

    They must be supportive of parent's rights in the education of their children.

    They must be supportive of policies that strengthen and promote the nuclear family.

    I'm sure there are others but these immediately come to mind. There are also many that aren't deal breakers but I still really really want.

    But in each of these instances Trump is far more likely than Biden (or those who pull his strings) to support these types of policies. I didn't vote for Trump the first time because of the kind of person he is but I have to admit that he acted more Conservative than any other president since Reagan and actually fulfilled some campaign promises that others only promised. 

    Exactly.  The media loves to portray him as an evil mastermind and some people swallow that hook, line, and sinker.

  3. 8 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

    It's bad enough voting for the least of two evils, this year it's the least scary. 🤷‍♀️

    Scary how?  Look at the last 4 years, then the 4 years before that.   It's not that scary.  They just want you to be scared.

  4. 7 minutes ago, zil2 said:

    I suppose you're "safe" until the next time your stake want to change any boundaries.  I wonder if there will be wards downgraded to branches, or if folks will opt for wards that cover a larger geographic area (that could be very challenging).

    We changed stake boundaries about 4 years ago.  I don't know what is considered a "larger geographic area", but from my house at the edge of the ward to the other side is about a 50 minute drive.

  5. 30 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

    I feel the same way about TKD, obviously on a much smaller scale without life or death stakes. Anyone who can step on the mat to compete has my respect, even if I want nothing to do with them in my personal life. And to be fair, I’m sure there are people in TKD who respect me for getting on the mats but want nothing to do with me either when the day is over. 

    I think the difference is that many circumstances require us to live with our teams 24/7 and depend on them for our lives.   Unit cohesion and trust is important.   If you can hump your own gear, not to mention the extra gear a team requires, you're a liability.  If you bring your drama to the unit, and the unit isn't allowed to sort it out, you're a liability.  If you can't execute your assigned position due to mental or physical ability, you're a liability.  If your relationship with a member of the team affects your, or their, ability to execute their assignment you're a liability.  Liabilities can lead to mission failure and or team death.  

    You don't have to like the person you're serving with, but you have to be able to operate with them.

  6. 36 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

     

    I'll admit that I've been out of uniform for a little over a decade, so I don't know the current dynamics of military readiness, but my gut reaction is that social politics and combat readiness aren't mutually exclusive, or at least they don't have to be. 

    I would disagree with a very strong emphasis on "dis"

  7. 34 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

    Do you think most people who served generally share your opinion? 

    I do.  However, I think LGB is also broken out.  But that isn't what we're talking about.  We're talking about being physically and mentally fit for duty and combat, specifically the job to which you're assigned.    When my peers refer to "woke" in that context, they are generally referring to switching the focus from combat readiness to social politics, which don't have a lot to do with combat readiness. 

  8. 9 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

    Thanks. 
     

    I work out every day, including a five mile run/jog, push ups, sit ups, scissors and jumping jacks, etc. So I’m in decent shape. However, I don’t think I could do what is required of you guys and girls.

    Sure you could.  You have to have a baseline, but 80% of it is mental.   Most things we do, the average male could do if they trained.  

  9. 5 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

    What are the physical requirements?

    So there weren't specific requirements because there didn't really have to be.  It was self-sifting.  Fall out on a ruck march?  Infantry isn't for you.  Can't score 270 on the APFT?  Better get working.  The training itself weeded them out.  Many people didn't go Infantry because they knew this.  
     

    As the failure and injury rates have increased, the Army has tried to set standards (requirements).  OPAT was used before BCT.  ACFT was used after.   ACFT is sprint/drag/carry, push-ups, plank, overhead ball toss, dead lift, and run.   It's the same test everyone else takes, you just have to score much higher.

  10. 47 minutes ago, zil2 said:

    Things in my subconscious left unspoken:  The "who are physically, mentally, and emotionally capable of doing the job" was a given in my brain.  Another unspoken prerequisite is that the standards aren't lowered or otherwise negatively altered just because someone who can't meet them happens to belong to some "special" group.  (I know, that wasn't your concern - or doesn't appear to be - I'm just adding it in to add it in.  And frankly, those unspoken rules would disqualify a lot of people, including the (vast?) majority of women.)

    This is an issue the Army has been struggling with.  As the Army has moved to complete integration there have been issues we didn't seem to have in large numbers.  Let's use physical ability and the Infantry as an example, and because Infantry is the best anyway.  😁

    Not everyone meets the physical qualifications for Infantry.  Historically, Basic Training and Advanced Infantry School weeded many of them out.  They've tried several methods of determining fair measurements of qualifications, but if one group meets the requirements far less, it gets junked.   OPAT and ACFT are examples.

     

     

  11. 12 minutes ago, Jamie123 said:

    It says here

    https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2023/march/encourage-enlisted-education-beyond-college#:~:text=We live in one of,personnel have a bachelor's degree.

    That only 7% of enlisted personnel have a bachelors degree. Are the people you're talking about mostly officers?

    No, I'm talking about enlisted.  Officers are required to have degrees before or shortly after commissioning.  Warrants are different.   However, I mostly work with senior enlisted and officers.   Your study is enlisted only, of which almost 2/3rds are junior (E-5 and below).  Most of those Soldiers, assuming they enlisted out of high school, wouldn't have had time to earn a degree yet.   Mid-level NCOs, E-6 and E-7, are typically working on degrees if they want to get promoted.  I know they exist, but I don't know any currently serving Soldiers in my area at my level that don't have a 4 year degree.  Most have, or are working on, a graduate degree.

    In the section that I manage, 88% have 4 year degrees.  Of those, 57% have a graduate degree or higher.

  12. 1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

    Sadly, this was popular in the 90’s too when I was a kid. One of my best friends in childhood joined the army right out of high school and all of us were stunned. She could have gone to any college in the Northeast and no one saw this coming. 

    Most of the Soldiers I work with have a minimum 4 year degree and many of us have graduate degrees.

  13. 3 hours ago, zil2 said:

    The LDS (and perhaps it's everywhere) habit of praising speakers and teachers for their talks and lessons makes me very, very uncomfortable.  No matter how often I might say that it wasn't me, it was the Spirit, there's always a "yeah, but..." (they don't understand what I mean when I say it wasn't me, it was the Spirit - that I'm being very literal).  I know people are just trying to cheer and encourage, but I don't think they understand the burden and risk that goes with such things - making it easy for the recipient of praise to start thinking too well of themselves.  I wish people would instead praise God for blessing the teacher / speaker and the hearers with the Spirit to guide both.  This would be a far better thing.

    NOTE: Saying "thank you" - I have no problem with.  Saying "oh you're so wonderful / smart / brilliant / insightful / whatever" - I gots problems.  I once had a sister tell me she loved everything I (ever implied) said (I wasn't teaching - I'd just made a comment in someone else's lesson).  I told her not to lay that burden on me, and not to put herself at such risk - to study scripture and listen to the Spirit instead.

    People, do your fellow saints a favor - thank them, but don't praise them.

    Particularly for new members, in my opinion.   Sometimes it can be very confusing when you receive constant praise, then assume you have a good grasp of things you really should study better.  New members often receive notoriety that isn't deserved.  Joining the Church is just the beginning but you're often looked upon as though you won some major award.   

    This also ties into leaders wanting callings for "power", as discussed above.  I needed a few good spiritual kicks in the nethers after being told repeatedly that I was the Golden Child.   I can't imagine why anyone would want a calling with any authority.  I keep my chin down and do my calling as best as I can, but it's draining.  I constantly feel inadequate.  I feel like I fail those who need my support the most.   I need more hours in the day.  I feel I disappoint God when I just want to strangle people I'm supposed to be serving.   

    That said, this post resonated with me.  It's almost like we set each other up for failure and do it with the best intentions.   I am so very grateful of the support and praise I get, but I feel like I'm just not living up to the hype.

  14. 3 hours ago, zil2 said:

    I know one young man who, on his mission, received a vision in a dream in answer to his prayer to better understand Joseph Smith's first vision.  He had done all he could prior to this prayer to understand - lots of study and discussion and prayer, obedience and service.  In the vision/dream, he was told he now had a duty to bear witness of what he'd been given (which is how I heard of it - in sacrament meeting).

     

    I probably wouldn't be a member if I hadn't heeded the advice to prayerfully act in faith and received a crystal clear answer.

  15. 13 hours ago, Maytoday said:

     

     

    This is a good point. I suppose its less of, I need statistics and data and more of a this is the most logical outcome.  Look at the world, so finely tuned. Most logical outcome, it was designed.

    I'm much the same way, which is in part what led me to this faith.  I'm an adult convert that made a post here one day asking questions.   Now here I am.   Using this logic only, what makes more sense to me?

    1.  There is a vengeful God that created man to spend eternity worshipping Him?

    2.  There is a premortal family existence in which a loving Father created an opportunity for us to grow, learn, and become like Him for eternity?