Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by Guest, Mar 3, 2003.
LMAO...well I still can't believe you had the balls to say that! Shame on you!!!
Hey I NEVER back down from an argument, evenif it WAS 5 years ago, and I incidentally happened to be WRONG...(a MINOR point... )
To think I thought these things would NEVER replace paper and books...I was only worried somebody would find a couple of my college PAPERS and quote me...(some things I predicted in the "American Foriegn Policy for the 80s" I wrote in 1979 actually DID come to pass with the fall of the USSR in '89-91, and my prediction that we would change from a East/West polarization to a North/South polarization, with China as a "wild card" was ACTUALLY pretty prescient, but my "no matter how you rearange the rails there will always be a bottom rail, our job is to stay as the TOP rail..." treatment of the "poor" Third World would probably be taken out of context and cost me an election someday when I would have to try and EXPLAIN I really am NOT a "Chauvinistic Capitalist Pig" by those remarks.... ) I NEVER thought somebody would dig up my ramblings from 5 YEARS ago on a stupid computer...and hold me TO 'em!
And for YOUR edification, SOMEWHERE on here from back then is ALSO my DEFENSE of "Women in Combat" TOO, you might want to find THAT and see if you don't like my "feminist" stand... It got pretty heated TOO if I remember right...coulda used your help in THAT firefight...
Hey, I'm a passionate Polak, I LOVE to argue, it's in my genes, even if I DO say something stupid, or get "hot," I NEVER mean anything by it, AND I LOVE it when I "get it handed BACK." The ONLY way you can LEARN is by ARGUING your position....you MAY learn your position is even MORE correct, but you just might learn that your own position is WRONG, too...
As to "supervising," I was using it in the "business" sense, as in "boss." And I agree, no matter WHAT the "flow chart" says your responsibilities are, you never REALLY surpervise a woman! ("Train," "beat," "Yell at," "Give up", "Ignore," "Discipline", 'Terminate," maybe, but never SUPERVISE... )
Always remember, "A Woman's place is in the STOVE!"
ROFLMAO!!! Polish, you are a HOOT! I never back down from an argument either...that's why I'm constantly "in trouble". Someone PM'd me the other day about my "talents" I have listed on my profile. I'll tell you like I told them, about the only "talent" I have is for trouble! One thing about it, though...my life is NEVER boring! For the most part, I enjoy getting my feathers ruffled (so to speak! hehe)!
And I don't want to be around those who agree with everything I say! I mean, how bloody boring is that?? I always love a challenge and I get bored easily (yet another one of my many, many faults).
And as far as passionate...hell, I'm an Irish-Italian redhead for God's sake! I mean, enough said there! Plus, that's one of my tattoos--japanese symbol for passion (just in case I forgot! lol).
ALRIGHTY...NOW...you aren't helping yourself with the insane "flow chart" crap! I caught on to the "business" analogy, but "effective" is NOT exactly the word I would use to describe it. So...uhh...good luck with all that "training" and "disciplining"...God knows enough men have tried that with me but were embarrassingly unsuccessful!
Oh and don't worry...I'll vote for you!! You make me laugh and I love to laugh! People always score extra points with me when they make me laugh!
...And wouldn't she get a bit cramped "in" the stove"?? LMAO
Well, I COULDA said:
"Women! You can't live WITH 'em....
....and you can't set them on FIRE unless you live in INDIA!"
And getting back to one of the questions and the topic...
Yes there WERE Female "snayperskayas" in the Soviet Army, as well as some female Soviet pilots. Merrindale in "Ivan's War" tells of one famous female ace who actually flew in a "mixed" guards squadron until she was killed. Many woman fought as normal grunts too at Stalingrad and Leningrad, and of course in the partisans.
However, MUCH of the use of females in combat after Kursk was curtailed, and towards the end most Soviet women who were in the Army, while probably at the front and under fire more than WACs and Waves, did essentially the same function, clerks, supplies, nurses, orderlies, support..."free a man to fight" even though the propagandists still spread the stories of the "women fighters of Communism" right to the end of the war.
They DID have a couple of squadrons of PO-2 biplane light bombers that flew night interdiction missions over German lines, called the "NIght Witches," ('Night Whores" by the Germans) weho would loter around and drop light bombs just to affect sleep, who got good at cutting engines and gliding over targets silently, dropping a couple of small bombs, and restarting and flying off and coming back to do it again, they were pretty famous and got a "unit citation" from Stalin.
But interestingly, the author spends a lot of time trying to figure out WHY the "Ivans" fought...so well and so hard despite the abuse and treatment by the NKVD and Stalin. She cites the similarities, but mostly the DIFFERENCES of all the studies done about combat and motivation in the West.
"Patriotic fever, God and Country" gets the recruits, just like in any army, but at least in the west, it quickly fades, and usually gets replaced by "duty," which then devolves into simply "get the job done to go home" and survival, sometimes hatred and revenge, but usually later it evoles into a very simple intense hope not to let your "brother's" down. But in the West, there was never really a doubt that you WERE fighting for YOUR way of life, which everyone KNEW was worth defending...
While she found similarities in the Russian Army, the patriotic fervor, then the "duty," then the "comrades," BUT there were so many OTHER factors involved...the hatred for STALIN due to collectivization, the deportation of the kulaks, ALL the shortages, and especially AFTER crossing the border and the troops seeing the WEALTH of capitalism and being able to see the miserableness of their lives, their was at the same time the troops started seeing the WORSE fighting, the survivors started to "buy into" the propaganda, and the speeches of the politruks, and some started to WORSHIP Brother Stalin, many who had never showed an interest, or even belittled it earlier, became "converts" and voluntarily joined the Communist party, listened to and started buying into the calls for "Revenge," and "Punishment" from Stalin that they had to deliver to the Germans so they would NEVER fight a war again (MAYBE they succeeded??)
It's kind of interesting, how the veterans who DID live, even though they KNEW the government was "lying" in it's accounts of the war, AFTER the war became GREAT Communists, and the best SUPPORTERS of "the system," almost so psychologically they could be part of the "fiction," and the "Myths" and avoid dealing with the "realities." And since NO ONE in Russia understood "psychology," there wasn't even a WORD for "Shell Shock" or "Battle fatigue" in Russian, there were very FEW "post traumatic stress cases" in the USSR, (although MANY more suicides and "self-inflicted" wounds than in the West, even at the front!) even though they saw the MOST and WORST fighting. And ALWAYS in the background was the ALTERNATIVE which was Soviet "Mental Hospitals," in the 50s, which were just different "gulags."
Russian "civilian" psychiatry and psychology is still a new art, and is now deeply involved in Western ideas, so the author thinks there will be a LOT of new material and ideas about "Why men fight" comparing notes from both sides, untainted by Soviet "Myth."
Well, Firebird, I could say "send 'em to southeastern Colorado," but that might be construed as tacky.
Seriously, my comment on the rape thing was not intended to apply to you. Your posts clearly show where you stand on that issue. As for the other, I was talking in general terms, not specific ones. I do think there is a genetic basis to the issue of aggresiveness, male vis-a-vis female. Higher brain function and societal mores can, and usually do control it, but it is still there.
LOL! Well, it's nice to know we might be wanted somewhere!
I never took anything as applied to me; I appreicate your thoughtfulness.
And I agree with you...unlike that whack-job who thinks women don't "mark their territory"!! ROFLMAO!!! JUST KIDDING!!
My atttaction to weapons and tactics is simply based on acceptance.
I accept the fact that there are bad people out there and choose to be ready, Just like I accept that fires can start and have a fire extinguisher.
I accept the fact that people can be injured and have a first aid kit.
There have been many who claim to have an alternative to violence but when they are portrayed in the movies, it is always some pacifist talking a bad guy down. Never works in real life. Many like to point to Gahndi. For one, there was armed resistence and Gahndi simply added large scale civil disobedience to the armed conflict. Second, the british Empire was in retreat and no longer had the stomach to do what was needed to hold on to India.
I would have loved to have seen what would have happened if Gahndi tried what did di to the British on Stalin or Mao.
Or on Hitler's Wehrmacht, Bernie.
You make a very valid point, I think. Too many of the liberal persuasion do not see the logical fallacy inherent in their disdain of weapons. It is people who kill other people, not the weapon. Like you, I consider a firearm in much the same way I do an insurance policy. I hope it is never needed, but if it is, it is is the only thing that can save your life.
Separate names with a comma.