[samsamsam]

I am a big fan of aircraft carriers because of the ability to project power without necessarily attacking anything. Subs can't do that. But I don't think China's strategy is to engage the US Navy on the open seas. It is more denial of access to its shores or access to the Taiwan Straight. It seems to have invested heavily into building carrier killing land based ASMs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-21

Some debate the effectiveness of this missile.

[infowarrior1]

(05-27-2016 07:56 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

So you're saying a military machine handcuffed to the rule of law is testament to its power?

Dude, Genghis Khan slaughtered his way through China and half the known world with just ponies, swords and bows, the only thing holding back any army in the world from pulverising pesky terrorists and guerillas is international law.

I'm pretty certain a few laws went by the wayside when the US military went in raw on Fallujah way back during Iraq. Al'Quaeda was cutting heads off 24/7 in that shit hole and killed some people they shouldn't have through IEDs and kidnappings.

The whole place was pacified until recently when IS took over it.

The rule of law exists for very good reasons. Once total war breaks out its anyone's guess. If you want to know what a military can do, the history of Africa in the past 100 years should tell you.

Genghis Khan established a modern army enforced by Draconian law which ensures absolute discipline that is based on merit and will go to any lengths to grab talent and put it to his own use. Ensuing good men at every level of his army.

This is what set him apart from other nomadic conquerors who came before him.

Its that he employed talent to help him adapt to various situations and not give a damn where it comes from.

This combined with the nomadic battle tactics won him the varied non-steppe landscape of China to the European countries of the Kievan Rus and Georgia to the Deserts of Persia to the land of Hungary and incursion into Poland before they were forced to withdraw due to the death of their Khan.

That and his armies use of psychological terror to ensue that more cities surrender than are willing to fight him.

[Vicious]

Steel wins battles, money wins wars.

Winning a war is about out-spending your opponent.

[Gmac]

(05-27-2016 08:55 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Doesn't really matter how powerful it is. All this "greatest country in the world" talk is just insecurity, and Americans are some of the most insecure pussies in the world. It's like that guy who won't shut up about his dick size, you wanna be around that kind of person? Then people wonder why the rest of the world considers the US and Israel two biggest threats to world peace....

My dad served.

I could go on about our technological superiority, how we've defended the world for decades, or how the US has been forced to join the fray and flex its military might in the past... but I'm not going to do that.

Does it make mistakes? Sure. Any military is only as strong as the commander-in-chief, as others have mentioned. We've had a long string of weak leaders, limiting potential and failing to channel and focus it properly. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc.

You know, the US Military gets a bad rap but it is one of the most prestigious careers you can aspire to here. It's great because of its people. The men (and women) in the Armed Forces are some of the most nationalistic, patriotic, caring people I've ever seen in my life. Phenomenal human beings, who unlike many other countries, sign up not because they a country mandate, but because they choose to serve. Joining the military teaches, no... trains you to be disciplined, focused, sharp, calm, and aware... and I'm not even talking combat. I'm talking about invaluable skills that can be passed down through generations.

"Semper Fidelis"
(Always Faithful)"
US Marines

"This We'll Defend"
US Army

Integrity First
Service Before Self
Excellence in All We Do
US Air Force

"Honor, Courage, Commitment"
US Navy

"Semper Paratus"
(Always Ready)"
US Coast Guard

If those slogans don't resonate with you in some way and you call yourself an American, maybe it's time you re-evaluate whats important to you. Your job, your family, your livelihood and well-being, your safety? Freedom?

Happy Memorial Day Weekend everyone.

[H1N1]

The answer to the question in the thread title, as someone else mentioned, is 'The greatest there has ever been'. There's really no debate. Other militaries have exercised more power historically, but none have had anything approaching the capacity of the US. Everything, from the sheer size and physicality of the average US GI upwards, about the US is bigger, better, and more dangerous than anywhere else. Indeed, for all those lamenting the tendency of the US military to 'fight with one arm tied behind its back', it is the surest sign of greatness to exercise restraint in the face of extraordinary provocation by your enemy. Indeed, the US military acts as it does because uncertain politicians meddle haphazardly in regions they have no business being in - and this uncertainty from a position of security causes them to think first of their chances of re-election, and second of the risk to US soldiers.

Were a very different situation to arise - one that credibly threatened the security and well-being of the general US populace (and Afghan, Iraq, etc cannot be said to have done this, or anything of the kind), you would see a capacity for great and tremendous violence that would be beyond biblical in its proportions. There is no nation on earth that could withstand it, though I think a Sino-Soviet alliance, were such a thing to happen, would require a long and difficult campaign to overcome. Certain Russian technologies are surprisingly advanced, particularly in this area of weapons guidance and targeting systems.

The level of innovation going on in the military sphere generally, and in America in particular, is simply staggering and too exciting to be adequately put into words.

The rail gun from earlier in the thread is an excellent example. Not only for how fascinating it is as a stand alone weapon system, but for the advances in projectile technology that have accompanied it. The article talks about the effect of this technology, developed for a speculative weapon, that has immediate, realisable benefits for existing weapons systems. When you think about the cost of a single missle, and compare it with the cost of these new projectiles, the effective cost has been more or less reduced to zero in one fell swoop. That is astonishing; a staggering, stand alone achievement.

To me, this is an excellent example of how the best innovation happens. This exact same process is how we will continue to make astonishing progress in the near future across myriad other technologies. It is why we should support fracking, and all sorts of other new technologies that are currently controversial. This in turn will lead to innovations which can be transplanted for use in other sectors as well - just as aspects of smart phone technology are now being used as a weapons guidance system.

America will continue to stay ahead, and pull ahead, of its rivals. Ultimately this is because of the unparalleled attitude of Americans generally. The American openness to improvement, to progress, and to adaption is totally without comparison. Take SF operations, for example. Not very long ago, hard as it may be to believe in this era of action movies, US SF was actually lagging quite a long way behind the likes of the SAS. The US were happy to be shown how to do it better, and much of the deserved reputation for competence that the current US SF was built on the back of the expertise of units like the SAS. Now, US SF have a fantastic selection and training process, are more or less on a par with the SAS operationally, and man for man are better equipped and supported than any other units on the face of the earth.

If Americans have a weakness, militarily, it is their inherent tendency to John Wayne everything, and to throw overwhelming force at situations. This can be seen in all the little details. For example, the US is very bad at the hearts and minds side of conflict that is an essential part of obtaining population compliance. Whereas British soldiers will be walking the streets, in berets, as soon as the immediate fighting is concluded, you will usually see US troops mounted, and wearing their helmets long after the initial threat has been subdued.

[Deepdiver]

Radical Islamization is an existential threat to the world - they HATE Buddists, Hindus, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox Christians, et. al., worldwide. They hate liberal Europeans and they above all HATE the USA and our ideas of FREEDOM that conflict with their core Sharia philosophy in the Koran and the Hadith, their sacred texts

I am a Christian and I was not raised to hate anyone - to the contrary.

However Men grow and after service on US Navy Nuclear Submarines, I learned that there are large blocks of people Sunni and Shia that if they can get their hands on Nukes will use them against the West including the USA without regard to the consequences which will be retribution in kind in their homelands.

Boys play games and sports... Men serve and defend their countries and this weekend I want to remember and give thanks to all those deployed in uniform, all those who have served and all those who have given their last true measure of love and devotion to the USA in service and sacrifice of their lives so that we may all live in FREEDOM.

May God Truly Bless the United States of America and guide us to always be servants in the cause of Freedom everywhere.

[Monty_Brogan]

Very. From the eyes of a lowly infantry veteran who served in the Corps -'03-'07, and did two tours to Iraq. On my second tour, one of our tasks was to train the Iraqi military. Bless these men, because I'm sure it took guts to sign up after their military was destroyed/disbanded.

Attempting to teach these men basic soldiering was akin to teaching 1st-graders trigonometry: it just wasn't happening. The cream of their crop: the weight lifting, perfect English speaking, western university educated Captain who struck fear into his men... if Iraq had 2,000 more of him in their military they might have a fighting chance to straighten out that country.

In my mind, our military is the best because of Americans. Put aside all of our technology that is above my pay grade.

Give me a platoon of Marines or soldiers, enough ammo and tell me what you want destroyed. In that platoon you'll have men from all walks of life from our great country: the kid from Texas who grew up hunting, the 4 star athlete from CA, the kid from WY whose grandfather taught him how hit a target 500 yards out, the kid from ID who rides bulls, the genius from CO who should've been an officer or who definitely should be studying engineering at a prestigious college but chose to fight instead, the kid from the Indian Reservation who can out drink any man, the farmer from IA, the logger from OR, the guy who used to run weapons for the mob out east. This is what my platoon looked like while I was in.

These men enlisted into the military and they probably didn't know it but their backgrounds made them the perfect candidate for an infantryman. They just needed to learn the ropes, they were already half way there.

Fighting is in our DNA.

[Chaos Preacher]

(05-28-2016 12:22 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 11:01 AM)Chaos Preacher Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 06:35 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:23 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Even with the fast-spreading rot and corruption within it, the US military is still the most incredible fighting force on this planet. There is no adversary that it couldn't overcome.

I'm fairly confident that the US could fight every other country on Earth in a conventional war at once, and win.

An amazing thing, really. The rest of the World should be thankful for this fact. Others would not be so restrained in the use of absolute power.

Perhaps so. I don't know. But just how useful is such an ability? Nation on nation warfare is utterly obsolete in this day and age.

Why do you think this is?

Because the days of "empire building" and "conquering and defending territory" are long over. We live in a world of global commerce. The wars today are waged economically, not militarily.

[Hannibal]

If the United States disappeared overnight, you would see "nation on nation" warfare make a swift return.

You're talking out of your ass. You're the same kind of guy who says "Lol, whats the point of building all that muscle? You're never going to use it for anything useful. No one fights or has to move anything heavy anymore."

[Chaos Preacher]

One habit of many Americans which I find very annoying is the concept of "American Exceptionalism."

Notice that Hannibal seems to think without US military power the rest of the world is likely to fall into some kind of barbarism.

[El Chinito loco]

(05-29-2016 10:18 AM)Hannibal Wrote:  

If the United States disappeared overnight, you would see "nation on nation" warfare make a swift return.

This is true but the principles behind M.A.D. would still apply for the biggest and most well armed nations.

I'm surprised at how many people ignore the fact that nukes and bio warfare exists. If people think this technology isn't being advanced into even deadlier versions in total secrecy then they are frightfully naive.

Back in the day even the Soviets researched a last stand type measure in case they lost a protracted war to the west. It was the cobalt bomb which would have destroyed a large portion of the earth. In otherwords the concept was if we go..everyone else goes. If you think China or modern day Russia hasn't thought of this scenario then people are being simple.

Modern day war between large nations is no longer about armies clashing on islands or even large scale naval warfare. It's about proxy conflicts and counter balancing each other so that one hand doesn't feel the need to reach out and start pushing red launch buttons.

People have been lulled into this sense of complacency since we aren't living in the cold war anymore that this is no longer a possibility.

Maybe it's because i'm a person who partially grew up in the 80's but the nuclear option and virus bomb is always on the table for any major conflict and has been since the mid 40's..

[Cobra]

I was feeling pretty patriotic in my last post. It is soon memorial day after all. So my post was more like a commercial.

Like everything, the Navy had its share of cons, a lot of it in the form of individual incompetence rather than unit ineffectiveness. However, these things affected me very little compared to how similar situations affected me in the civilian world. Most of the time things still worked because the leadership or other sailors were strong enough to pick up the slack for the slackers.

Yes, incompetent officers was one of them. I still remember one guy, who somehow got through officer school and wAs a skinny nerdy looking dude. The captain wouldn't let him stand watch as Officer of the Deck (guy in charge off hours when the captain ain't around) because he looked frail. The guy literally looked like he didn't have a spine, physically. He wasn't an asshole like the other officers so I tolerated him.

Then there were some of the Annapolis academy fags that considered themselves to have some air of superiority above the enlisted men. There were not many officers that I would have had a beer with. Even the ones I would, most were prior enlisted. They were effective administrators to put the cogs in place as far as planning and strategy. However, their execution was lackluster at best.

Aside from the officers, you also had the bottom of the barrel that could have been from the ghetto or from the red neck of the deep south or even immigrants like myself that just wanted to do the bare minimum to get citizenship. However, this was VERY few of them. The military was their last hope so they "volunteered." There was a higher trend among these guys getting kicked out for doing something stupid or neglecting their job.

Then there was the bureaucracy. Sometimes it was tough to get shit done and enlisted people's voices often meant nothing to an officer that you just met. You can prove yourself to one guy but when another guy sees you as a lower ranked scrub, at some commands or units, they will often dismiss your ideas.

Now another thing about unit effectiveness that all of this was overshadowed by as I initially noted. Most ships in the Navy go through extensive practice drills and pretty rigorous inspections that ensure that people are ready for shit to go down. There is a lot of shit that happens inside the belly of a ship if it gets hit off the coast of Bosnia. Everyone counts and everyone's skill level and diligence is important. They train pretty extensively on everything from patching pipes to fighting fires to ensuring the safety of key personnel. This system is a well oiled machine. Even from a maintenance stand point, if there is a pipe or some plumbing that literally doesn't work, someone would know about it.

Ah yes, and the fire control systems. There are specific Fire Control Technicians that are trained to absolutely know their shit. A fighter plane, a sub or another ship cannot even get close to a ship within the battle group without being known tracked and destroyed by simple fire control. That could be automatic, or even more controlled depending on the speed and trajectory of the enemy. I know it well and I've seen it work. I highly doubt that other countries are as well trained in these systems as we are. I am extremely comfortable that we will never be invaded by sea or non-commercial air in my lifetime.

And oh yeah, again, the diversity and having people form different backgrounds in certain jobs definitely oiled certain departments on the command better than others. There were a few samoans for example that were Gun controlmen and they were the shit. Mofos taught me everything I know about weapons. Some awesome phillipinos that were amazing at damage control and even engineering. Then there were some awesome black men (and women) that were just great at deck seamanship. Shit was real and it was the real america the way it should be on the outside.

[Kona]

(05-29-2016 02:23 PM)Cobra Wrote:  

There were a few samoans for example that were Gun controlmen and they were the shit. Mofos taught me everything I know about weapons. Some awesome phillipinos that were amazing at damage control and even engineering.

I hear there was one guy that's part Samoan AND part Filipino that was the coolest dude in the whole Navy!

Seriously though, one of the things I loved was how many other things outside of my normal job that I had to have a general knowledge of. I hope that makes sense.

I spent a lot of time on amphibious assault ships. Those things are equipped to do an outrageous amount of jobs. I got a crash course in lots of them. I got basic lessons flying Harriers and Cobras, did target practice with MARSOC and SEAL snipers, drove LCAS, learned how to amputate legs, make 10000 buttermilk pancakes, hunt submarines and all kinds or other shit.

If an officer goes down in a job that does one of those things, somebody's got to fill in right away.

Aloha!

[Leonard D Neubache]

It's interesting that a lot of people here see the US army a deterrence against China or Russia invading the US. Frankly I'm not sure why anyone thinks China or Russia would do that, even if the US left the doors wide open for them. While the US military is undoubtedly the most powerful in the world it's currently not much more than a tool for the globalist elites.

So in that regard I personally pray for Russia and China to maintain the strength needed to hold a stalemate until the rotten financial foundations of globalist control collapse out from under us.

I would rather be dirt poor and fighting some undertrained, underequipped Chinese troops than become part of a planetary slave plantation.

[Horus]

I recently read that 500 000 US troops would be required to conquer and secure Afghanistan. Assuming this is true, why is it so much more difficult in the modern world to secure conquered lands? The entire British army (with the exception of wartime) numbered fewer soldiers than this when they held dominion over a quarter of the world, not just a small central-Asian shit hole. Is it because of better communications resulting in more effective rebellions? Is is because the armies of yesterday were more ruthless? I understand that it would be impossible to conquer a nuclear power such as Russia due to the threat of mutually-assured destruction, but would America have the capacity to build a 19th century-style empire? Or are those days gone?

[Patriarch]

(05-29-2016 10:34 AM)Chaos Preacher Wrote:  

One habit of many Americans which I find very annoying is the concept of "American Exceptionalism."

Notice that Hannibal seems to think without US military power the rest of the world is likely to fall into some kind of barbarism.

One habit I find annoying of non-Americans is their lack of gratitude for our country's massive, lopsided contributions to NATO and getting our hands dirty so eurofags can sleep soundly at night and spend their entire nation's budget on welfare for rapefugees.

No offense, of course.

[Horus]

(05-30-2016 07:31 AM)Patriarch Wrote:  

One habit I find annoying of non-Americans is their lack of gratitude for our country's massive, lopsided contributions to NATO and getting our hands dirty so eurofags can sleep soundly at night and spend their entire nation's budget on welfare for rapefugees.

No offense, of course.

Absolutely. The civilised world owes a huge debt of gratitude towards America for knocking out the bad guys in WWII and the maintaining the Pax Americana over the last seventy years. If America reverted to isolationism after WWII and didn't stand up to communist expansion in the Korean and Vietnam wars, (and by proxy in Afghanistan), and by bolstering NATO in Europe, the Western world would suck balls.

Thanks America. If it weren't for you guys, I'd be speaking Japanese right now.

[PhDre]

Am I the only non-American here who is fucking jealous of your military?

As an engineer I get a massive boner for a lot of the weapons systems your country developed: stealth planes, the F22, the railgun, laser cannons, the missile shield, aircraft carriers, advanced radar systems...

I would rather have my tax money spend on those things (and make a nice salary developing them) than on attracting millions of rapefugees and funding lazy people's lifestyle (yes, I know that some stuff like the power grid, internet access, public transport etc is of far higher quality in Europe but most of our taxes do go to social security).

In terms of military tech, we are at least a decade behind in Europe.
In terms of power and efficiency, there is simply no comparison possible.

The sad thing is, as some pointed out, that your military is not used to serve the interests of your country, but to serve those of the globalist elite.

[Guitarman]

The big problem with the US military is the new "stealth" fighters. The F-35 is widely derided as a Turkey, a poor fighter that can't climb, can't turn and is poor in the ground attack role, and spends 95% of it's operational time on the ground being serviced. And the F-22 is far too expensive, complex and in service in far too small a number. Think the ME-262 in WWII. This was a jet fighter that was a generation ahead of the British and American planes but in service in so small a number that it did not affect the course of the war.

Air power wins modern wars and the newer US planes are severely lacking. The Russians and Chinese now have radar and missile systems (VHF radar) that can see the US stealth aircraft. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...radar.html

Plus, look up the Sukhoi PAK-FA 50. A Russian stealth air superiority fighter that is every bit as good as the F-22 but cheaper to make and easier to maintain and keep in the air.

The Russian fighters already in service such as the SU-27, SU-30 and 35 are not stealthy but can literally run rings round the cumbersone F-35. In war games against Indian Sukhoi jets the F-35 lost badly.

America desperately needs a great modern air superiority fighter and a great ground attack fighter bomber to be a great millitary again.

And not only that but the Russians now have electronic warfare equipment that is a decade ahead of the US. To the extent that one fighter equipped with a Khibiny EW pod allegedly shut down the Aegis system on the USS Donald Cook. https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2...black-sea/

[Easy_C]

Reposted before, and will respost again because it's necessary.

All of you crowing about how America is the "best and the world", and then going on to cite how it's awesome because of our high-tech equipment don't get it. The Army continually comes up with ridiculously expensive solutions that do nothing in the real world. For example, those minerollers that cost 50grand each? Defeated with about a buck's worth of extra wiring.


Here's how the REAL army works, as described by a West Point grad, airborne ranger, Harvard MBA, and well known Real Estate investor:

http://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s...s-generals

Quote:

As a result of this Web site, I am starting to become a clearing house of current complaints about the military from current or recent active duty personnel. I watch a bunch of the cable TV stuff and other media stories about the military. They tend to focus on equipment and ancient history, like World War II, but you can still get a substantial feel for the current military. I see some differences but more similarities to the 1970s than differences.

From the outside since the 1970s, the basics appear unchanged:

the military is still a federal government bureaucracy
we appear to be making no more progress in asymmetrical wars
guys with medals for bravery and Purple Hearts are being passed over and guys with nothing but bureaucrat recognition are being promoted to top general positions as happened back in the ’70s
West Point recently announced various incentives to agree to a longer commitment including free graduate schooling
the officer rating system is still entirely ratings of subordinates by superiors (See Ltc. Paul Yingling’s article where he complains about that)
many of the articles at my military web site were triggered by current events and media reports (like the falsification of the Osprey helicopter maintenance records) and cite those reports as well as other events that have been reported in the media since I got out of the Army in the 1970s

[budoslavic]

(05-27-2016 08:55 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Doesn't really matter how powerful it is. All this "greatest country in the world" talk is just insecurity,

Insecurity? No. Most Americans tend to be patriotic. Some of us are willing to make the sacrifices to honor and defend our country by putting our lives on the line. Even if this meant getting attacked on America soil. This is why we bear the right to arms.

We *used* to be the greatest country. Right now, our country's reputation has been damaged and ruined by corrupted politicians and anti-American PC lefties.

(05-27-2016 08:55 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

and Americans are some of the most insecure pussies in the world.

(05-27-2016 08:55 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

It's like that guy who won't shut up about his dick size, you wanna be around that kind of person?

Americans tend to be patriotic. There is nothing wrong with that.

(05-27-2016 08:55 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

Then people wonder why the rest of the world considers the US and Israel two biggest threats to world peace....

What about the current massive Muslims invasion of Europe? Or how about ISIS spreading terror all over the globe? Do you see them as threats or not?

(05-29-2016 06:38 AM)Gmac Wrote:  

My dad served.

I could go on about our technological superiority, how we've defended the world for decades, or how the US has been forced to join the fray and flex its military might in the past... but I'm not going to do that.

Does it make mistakes? Sure. Any military is only as strong as the commander-in-chief, as others have mentioned. We've had a long string of weak leaders, limiting potential and failing to channel and focus it properly. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc.
...
Happy Memorial Day Weekend everyone.

Ditto. My late father and four of my late uncles all served and fought in WWII as part of "The Greatest Generation". It was something they were proud of despite the fact that my father never talked about the horror of war itself, but he did talk about it a little bit (i.e., his regiment & division, where he fought, etc.).



NSFW

Happy Memorial Day.

[Enoch]

Am I unpatriotic for saying I would not have enlisted in any US war since the Revolutionary War? Come to think of it I probably would have sided with the British.

[Mr. Wolf]

We have 10 Nimitz-class Carrier Strike Groups. These are Nuke-powered behemoths, capable of traveling at 35 mph. 24/7, comprising a mobile forward air base that can lay waste to anyone and anything we wish. It is good to be the King:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_strike_group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimitz-cla...ft_carrier

Each one of those 10 separate military forces can be configured to defeat any other nation on Earth.

For the sake of argument, assume that two such groups were parked 12 miles off-shore from any other nation. The U.S. can do that at will, and on very little notice. 12 miles is the limit for sovereign waters.

That is why anyone who thinks about fucking with President Trump will awake in a cold sweat and reconsider such lunacy.

Yes, it is indisputable that the U.S. military has its problems and challenges, but those are inconsequential when considering its ability to project power. The A-10 is far superior to the F-35 in close air support, but the bad guy will care not who delivers the ordinance that sends him on his way to Allah. Debating all this stuff is like talking about the number of angels to fit on the head of pin. Don't matter.

Trump 2016!

[BlackHat]

The military is what makes U.S the only undisputed superpower in the world. It is at least 20 years ahead of its closest rival Russia if not more, possibly even 25-30.

[Walker]

The US armed forces are the best in the world and they're awesome because of our high-tech equipment.

It doesn't all work perfectly, but that was always out of the question. Failed experiments come with the job description of creating weapons and tools that didn't exist before, as solutions to problems that caught people off guard. No matter how smart and dedicated the experimenters are, they'll make a dud from time to time. The successful experiments are worth it.

The neo-con sales pitch that I reject is the one that claims our grunts are anything special. They're mostly just underpaid, overworked men who volunteered for a job that has had a terrible reputation for underpaying and overworking its employees for many years. It takes certain character flaws to sign yourself up for that.

That can mean being reckless enough to sign up without doing research on how bad grunts have it, despite having the option to do something else with your life. Or spineless and submissive enough that even though you know how bad the military can be, you still get peer pressured into joining by speeches and articles like Gmac's post. Or bloodthirsty enough to want a chance to kill people and get away with it to the point of not caring about anything else.

If you desire to put your life on the line for your country, but have a well-informed big picture view, you end up in a dangerous civilian job like firefighter or wilderness EMT or rope access technician or construction laborer. Reserve your gratitude for those people, not military grunts.