Fighting at St-Jean

[Strike]

Look's like Ape's verbal abilities will be lost in the infantry.  I'd suggest you OT to Nav or something but when they speak no one listens anyway...or is that ATC?  Just kidding guys.

Ref: Dealing with the idiots, if you decide to approach the annoying one make sure you have someone there to back you up.  Not saying this person is muscle, but the last thing you need is the clown going and whining to the staff that you are harrassing him.  At least you have an "honest broker".  Therefore it's best to get someone to come along that doesn't care for either of you or hang out with you.

 

[Glorified Ape]

Look's like Ape's verbal abilities will be lost in the infantry.   I'd suggest you OT to Nav or something but when they speak no one listens anyway...or is that ATC?   Just kidding guys.

Not at all - I can regale my troops with nary-used and oft-forgotten words from days of yore in their free time! I'll open their minds to the wonders and glory of verbosity! I'll occupy down time with vocabulary tests! I'll probably get "accidentally" shot on tour.

How the heck did this go from "fighting in st-jean" to using words like acuitous and quoting Sun Tzu ??

Because I'm an idiot and inadvertently redirected the thread. Apologies.

Ha, I knew as soon as I read it that you would use "unnecessary" as a caveat. 

Try finding a mentally acuitous (where the hell did you get that word from?) military or state or a group of people who agree on where "unnecessary" lies. 

Agreed. I searched "acuitous" before using it and couldn't find any official uses but said "wtf" and used it anyway. I like it - it should be a word... "acuteness" just looks and sounds so sloppy and inarticulate.

Glorified Ape: I don't think 2 Cdo was refering to you, there's a post from G-man earlier in the thread...

Yeah, my bad... I thought G-man was mdh from the avatar and assumed it was just another ad hoc abbreviation of my user name.

 

[airforcedave]

I do recall being told about an altercation during IAP.  It was after we got back from the grizzly tasking and some people decided to celebrate passing the course.  Happend in the mess Sgt's and WO's mess (as this is the mess they tell us to use while on course).  MPs had to break it up, heard some charges were laid. 

But you'll have to get the rest of the details from someone who was there.  I decided to rest my eyes a bit in bed before I headed down. But when I was finished, it was morning.  ;D

 

[043]

This is no longer the "good old days" you know.   Thankfully the CF does not allow that kind of garbage to happen anymore, that and no blanket parties, code reds, shower parties and other crap/hazing they used to do.

Sounds like you might have been on the recieving end of a few blanket parties, Sir.

If you think there is something wrong with 2 soldiers who have a disagreement to take out behind the monkey bars, your not Combat Arms. There is a time and a place for everything.

 

[Gill557]

Sounds like you might have been on the recieving end of a few blanket parties, Sir.

If you think there is something wrong with 2 soldiers who have a disagreement to take out behind the monkey bars, your not Combat Arms. There is a time and a place for everything.

Yeah there is a time and place for everything, and true the combat arms may be one of them, but St-Jean is not one of them, at least in my humble opinion.  I figure guys could wait until you do hand-to-hand training, or those padded sticks, I can't remember the name of them today, more to the point do we still use those? 

Besides here at the Mega, the MP's got f*ck all to do, they'd just love to catch guys fighting with each other, it'd give them a purpose, or at least amusement for an hour.

And as for me, never been code reded, seen it happen to one guy.  Then of course there's the movies, (ex. Full Metal Jacket) and the stories I've heard from the older guys, the ones with time in and the CFR officers here, former Sgt's, WO's, MWO's and CWO's, (no offense to the navy guys, same ranks for the navy) who've mostly got 15 years in already. 

Other then that I try to keep out of trouble, lol as much as that's possible. But seriously, there's no sense pissing off people I'm gonna have to work with and train with.

 

[Kat Stevens]

While indiscriminate nuckle busting is not the way to sort things out(quiet, all you guys that knew me back in the day),  sometimes a level of slack adjustment is required that negotiation just doesn't achieve.  In that case, a short, sharp shock, and they never do it again...I mean good manners don't cost nothing, do they.......Apologies to Roger Waters

CHIMO,  Kat

 

[043]

While indiscriminate nuckle busting is not the way to sort things out(quiet, all you guys that knew me back in the day),   sometimes a level of slack adjustment is required that negotiation just doesn't achieve.   In that case, a short, sharp shock, and they never do it again...I mean good manners don't cost nothing, do they.......Apologies to Roger Waters

CHIMO,   Kat

CHIMO

 

[paracowboy]

I figure guys could wait until you do hand-to-hand training, or those padded sticks

it's all training  They're called pugil sticks. And I'd rather have young hellions who can't wait to mix it up, than someone with no aggression. I can bend an over-aggressive troop to my will, but I can't instill that drive in someone who doesn't have it to begin with. Give me ferocious young attack dogs. I can control them as long as I keep them more afraid of me than I am of them. And I have pretty big teeth (they're getting a little long, but they still have enough bite to deal with even the fiercest puppy  )


;D

 

[Infanteer]

I've seen a few guys sort things out with fisticuffs - not in training but in general Army stuff - sometimes its good that guys settle things.   Paracowboy is right - if you expect guys to be aggresive, it may sometimes spill over.   Expecting everybody to be a tee-totler or buddy buddy in the Army is setting yourself up for disappointment; if you think "we don't do this anymore", you've got your head in the sand.   Personally, I would rather give a couple troops extras for fighting then deal with two soldiers lighting up the sheets at night in todays touchy-feely Army.

Before going into a raid (ok, cordon and search, but raid sounds much cooler), my section commander told us "it's better to hold back the dogs then to prod the sheep forward" or something like that.

Remember, we sent 5 Divisions of Canadians who fought against hardened German soldiers and liberated Europe, and they resorted to this often, so don't tell me that it destroys cohesion and morale.

 

[043]

"It's really not an issue with me, I am not a politician or a policy maker, just an old soldier.  Any doubts on my part could get someone killed."  Sgt. First Class John Marshall - KIA Iraq, 08 April 2003

Love the quote Infanteer. Read the book, thought is was well done. Read another one just after that one about the Marines advance. Brutal!!!!!

 

[Fusaki]

Scrapping and Blanket Parties still happen on certain courses. Not that I've ever been involved or even seen anything like that...

Here's a hypothetical scenario, that never actually happened, and any similarities to actual events are purely coincidental:

You've got Pte Bloggins, 4 weeks into his BIQ in Meaford. Then You've got Pte. Smith, just recoursed into Pte Bloggin's platoon. For whatever reason, Bloggins and Smith just don't get along. Smith thinks Bloggins is a cocky little SOB and Bloggins thinks Smith is an asshole who just likes to throw his weight around. One day, after an exchange of words Bloggins and Smith decide that they'd better take it outside. After a few minutes roughing each other up, Pte Jones comes outside for a smoke, sees the commotion and calls over some other troops to break up the fight. The result? Smith and Bloggins don't talk to each other outside of work, but still have a certain level of respect for each other for having the stones to get out and fight. There's no more smart ass comments between them, talking behind each other's back, or anything else. The entire platoon knows where both Smith and Bloggins stand with each other, so we can reasonably say that everything is out in the open.

Fast forward 3 weeks. Its the final BIQ field ex: Pro Patria 1 and 2. Smith and Bloggins end up building a snow defence together. Its 0330 hours, the boys haven't slept for a few days, and they're not looking forward to the next day's advance to contact. They are now put in a position where one man shovels snow while the other rests, and each trusts the other to warn him when the Platoon Warrant is coming so that they can both look busy. If either of them gets caught slacking, the WO will start launching paraflares, a stand too will be called, and the boys getting their precious few minutes rack will be forced back to the fighting positions. The stakes are high, but you do what you gotta do, right?

By the time grad day rolls around, Smith and Bloggins might still not like each other, but at least the TRUST each other and RESPECT each other as SOLDIERS. They might never talk again, but they know that if shit happens, they'll be there for each other.

And thats all that matters. If Smith and Bloggins didn't scrap it out early on, the beef between them would fester and divide the platoon. If the course staff ever caught on, the entire platoon would pay the price in one form of "Group Therapy" or another. Scrapping man - to - man is often the quickest, quietest, and most effective means of settling dispute.

 

[Infanteer]

Very Good post, Ghostwalk.

I especially like this part:

And thats all that matters. If Smith and Bloggins didn't scrap it out early on, the beef between them would fester and divide the platoon.

It is like a pack of girls who are fighting and continually talk, spread rumours, snipe, and connive about eachother.  After most rounds of fisticuffs, its a nod and move on; both have put up and shut up.

 

[Kat Stevens]

But, back to the original question.  If you go to Boot with an "anyone f*ucks with me gets dead" kind of attitude, you may find yourself on the bottom of a pile of very unhappy recruits. Nuckles are a useful tool, not the only tool....

CHIMO,  Kat

 

[paracowboy]

But, back to the original question.   If you go to Boot with an "anyone f*ucks with me gets dead" kind of attitude, you may find yourself on the bottom of a pile of very unhappy recruits. Nuckles are a useful tool, not the only tool....

CHIMO,   Kat

very true. At the very bottom line, it's about teamwork.

 

[Gill557]

it's all training   They're called pugil sticks. And I'd rather have young hellions who can't wait to mix it up, than someone with no aggression. I can bend an over-aggressive troop to my will, but I can't instill that drive in someone who doesn't have it to begin with. Give me ferocious young attack dogs. I can control them as long as I keep them more afraid of me than I am of them. And I have pretty big teeth (they're getting a little long, but they still have enough bite to deal with even the fiercest puppy   )
;D

Can I ask how you keep them more afraid of you?  No offense intended I'm just trying to see how section commanders act and how they lead, I'm working towards command of an infantry platoon myself, hopefully I can measure up to the men/women I am supposed to lead and I'm trying to learn all I can in advance.  I've been told I'm not supposed to yell or anything like that, they tell me that's why I've got a WO and Sgts.
Actually that leads to another question.  What exactly do I do as an infantry platoon commander?  (So sue me I didn't ask when I first signed up, I just wanted to serve my country.)

very true. At the very bottom line, it's about teamwork.

I hear that.  That was one of the biggest things they stressed to us both at BIQ and at IAP/BOTP.  Any weak links in the chain means the possibility of people getting turned into pink mist and bone chips, so I've been told.


Also, I think some people think that I'm saying that troops shouldn't use violence or something like that.  Totally untrue, I'm not entirely crazy about this, what was it somebody said, the "touchy feely army".  If you wanna go out there and beat the crap out of each other to settle your differences by all means, go ahead.  Just do two things:
1) Don't get caught by the MPs that's all I'm saying, especially at St-Jean.
2) Make sure it ends there, don't bring it back into the barracks. Do the deed, shake hands and tell the Sgt. you both got hit by a door or something.

 

[Glorified Ape]

I can see confrontation being useful in sorting out problems, I just don't see the utility of violence in the situation. You want to have it out with someone, go somewhere and have it out with them. Tell them what you think, what your problem is, and what you want them to do about it and let them do the same. So many stupid conflicts get blown out of proportion because the two parties involved simply misunderstand each other on something. Beating each other up isn't going to solve that - the underlying issue/misunderstanding is still there waiting to boil over again. If the argument was about who would win in a fight, fine, but other than that I can't see a scrap being the optimal solution. It's like taking a sledgehammer to your engine block because your car won't start - what's the point?  It doesn't solve anything, it just lets you act like some distempered boob.

I'm not saying it won't happen, but to endorse it, either implicitly or explicitly, just doesn't make sense. I also don't see how having no desire to engage in unnecessary, aimless violence equates to somehow being less capable in the combat arms. I would think the control and discipline you demonstrate by not engaging in such juvenile behaviour would be more useful.

 

[paracowboy]

G-Man, to prevent hi-jacking, I've sent you a pm.

 

[DogOfWar]

I can see confrontation being useful in sorting out problems, I just don't see the utility of violence in the situation. You want to have it out with someone, go somewhere and have it out with them. Tell them what you think, what your problem is, and what you want them to do about it and let them do the same. So many stupid conflicts get blown out of proportion because the two parties involved simply misunderstand each other on something. Beating each other up isn't going to solve that - the underlying issue/misunderstanding is still there waiting to boil over again. If the argument was about who would win in a fight, fine, but other than that I can't see a scrap being the optimal solution. It's like taking a sledgehammer to your engine block because your car won't start - what's the point?   It doesn't solve anything, it just lets you act like some distempered boob.

I'm not saying it won't happen, but to endorse it, either implicitly or explicitly, just doesn't make sense. I also don't see how having no desire to engage in unnecessary, aimless violence equates to somehow being less capable in the combat arms. I would think the control and discipline you demonstrate by not engaging in such juvenile behaviour would be more useful.

I dont see it as juvenile at all. Once the deed is done most guys move on. In fact I would say that Ive been in more than my share of scraps. and I always shake hands and buy them a drink after. Win or lose. Once your both licking your wounds the issue seems pretty small. Maybe Im a  caveman- but I dont trust a guy who doesnt believe in his point of view enough to knuckle up. I dont talk behind peoples backs and I expect the same from others- point the issue out to me and we'll work on it from there. Doesnt always mean we fight but if it happans it happens. While in BMQ that stuff happens on weekend leave. Certainly dont do it on the base. The MP's are bored and would love to get ahold of that.

And as for the attitude in the forces Ive come accross towards it- I was involved in a "thing" that left me with 3 gaping holes in my face from having a ku-baton shoved through it and when I reported for course the next day my instructor pulled me aside and said "thank god- I was getting worried about the forces today. No one on your course had shown up drunk or bloody. I hope you got 'em good"

This is an aggressive business. You are either or aggressive or your the other guy- I had a guy on boot camp who didnt want to go to the range because he didnt like violence. Which are you?

 

[dc445]

So no fighting, what happens if this certain individual is threat to the safety of yourself and the others around you (through certain 'soldiering' incidents)? Can't deal with it yourself then?

 

[Infanteer]

I can see confrontation being useful in sorting out problems, I just don't see the utility of violence in the situation.

I take it you've never been in a fight?