14/03/2006

  • I saw this on another blog:


    "...And the Navy can't march because THEY ARE THE NAVY, end of discussion. Lack of discipline would be the prominant factor there, not because of inexperience or ignorance." (12/Mar/06)


    To the blogger's credit and gift of careful observation, a recent previous post of that blog offered ample visual evidence that the USN is slack when it comes to marching.  However, despite the accurate conclusion, the above post has extremely flawed and strange logic.  The USN's marching ability is because of the visual evidence, not just because the USN is the USN.  It is the same fallacy and flawed logic as the USN saying the USAF is the "chair force" and good for nothing just because it is the USAF.  End of Discussion.


    The USN is better than the USAF in some military aspects and the USAF is better than the USN is some miltary aspects.  The same with the USMC and USA (i.e, US Army) relative to each other and the USAF and USN.  There is no significant overall superiority over the other. Get over the USN-USAF-USA-USMC rivalries and grow up.  To criticize them without helping them (i.e, destructive criticism rather than constructive criticism) is nothing but the vice of selfishness and extreme pride.  No wonder we are not winning Iraq and other campaigns.  We are too busy fighting and disagreeing amongst ourselves about which armed force is the best rather than uniting and accomplishing the winning objective of those just wars.  We are the UNITED States, not the disjointed States or Armed Forces.  This is not to say that miltary rivalries are categorically wrong since rivlaries can sharpen each other to be better and can foster comradery at games.  This is only to say that miltary rivalries taken to the extreme is not right.

Comments (7)

  • I am not part of any military, so I don't really understand these "battles." I understand rivalry and the need to take bride in your respective branch or force (or whatever the name-me showing my ignorance). However, I would think that each group would take pride in and respect the other groups because they all seem to be a unit. Each group relies on another because if there was just one group, no matter how much better it is than the other groups, without these other groups, it would fall.

  • Very true!  That is one thing that I am saying.

  • Yeah, I'd feel more comfortable knowing my national defense was in the hands of military groups who weren't bickering amongst themselves. Not that they are, but the attitude of rivalry doesn't really seem helpful.

  • in answer to your question, aparently azul is also charming in that context according to our spanish teacher.

  • i LOVE the NAVY!!!! hahaha.....

  • Released from my Oath of Office (which contradicts Scripture)...

    Out of curiousity, what is this oath and what in it contradicts Scripture?  Or is it the very fact that it's an oath (which Jesus forbade)?

    As I said, just curious.

    In Christ, and for the gospel of the kingdom,
    Brett

  • 1a.   The Affadavit (which includes the Oath of Office) is Standard Form 61 (SF 61) found at the following URL:

    http://www.opm.gov/forms/html/sf.asp

    1b.  "I, ____, do solemnly swear (or affirm)that-­ ... I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;...." is the section of the Oath what I believe to be not consistent with Scripture.

    2.  I love both the Navy and the Air Force.

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment