CrazyAce 0 Posted July 19, 2009 (edited) It’s a state of mind I would say that prepares people for what’s ahead, rather than reality vs virtual. For what I know about any military worldwide, I would not choose to fight another man’s war, but would rather defend my home against any hostile intent in my back yard. In a sense, virtual is as close to reality I will probably come close to in my life time, but if it all came down, I'd be ready. Edited July 19, 2009 by CrazyAce Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tobmic 10 Posted July 19, 2009 Being in army doesnt mean you go to war next day and you get shot from a bullet or whatever . Its a job you do and you get good paid for it. However i been in german army its kindergarten there anyway ... luckily i was in Mechanised infantery group we had harder training there. If you join USMC or Legion in France things might be different i guess but however you get trained hard for it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted July 19, 2009 Its a job you do and you get good paid for it. That pretty much depends on your interpretation of good. :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted July 19, 2009 I doubt that you know what you are talking. Games like ArmA can not even prepare you enought for a single day in a large scale exercise manouver.Everything is much more complicated in the unforgiving reality. I know what I'm talking about, read my post again. If I didn't play the games at all, I'd know much less about maneuvering and the dynamics of a firefight. In other words I am better off having played the games than not having played them, no implications of having turned into a battlefield god or war hero. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
afp 1 Posted July 19, 2009 In my experience the Army puts you of the Army. :)))) soo true... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tincup 10 Posted July 19, 2009 You are young when you join up for the most part, that is one of the reasons there is an age limit. At a younger age, men especially have a feeling of invunerability, and they are still at a very impressionable state. That makes it easier to mold into soldiers, as they haven't become jaded with their limited life experiences. But these young men join for various reasons, sometimes it is there heritage that pushes them into the direction of the military. Several generations of my family served, I just always knew I would as well. There are times too when people join due to lack of options as well. Once you turn 18 it is unlikely to find yourself on a road full of job opportunities, so lack of options sometimes force a persons hand so to speak. It may their best opportunity of having a chance to get out of their little town or a bad situation. The other are the gung-ho types that just want to shoot and blow stuff up, and what better place is there to do that? With all that said, I don't think a game is likely to push you in one direction or the other when making your decision to serve or not. Granted I served my time in the late 80's into the late 90's. So it was a different time then. Maybe I would be of a different opinion had I grown up in a different generation. But in my opinion, the game is still just that a game. The game can not convey the feeling you have seeing a friend in your unit lying there with his guts hanging out after being hit with an IED. The sheer terror that is war is hard to put into words, much less portrayed in a game. I applaud any man or woman willing to don the uniform to defend their country. I did it for years, and if you were to ask me of my time served. I would tell you it was one of the best times of my life, but there are experiences within that time that will haunt my thoughts forever. It is not a decision that should be taken lightly even though that is normally the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Master gamawa 0 Posted July 19, 2009 In my country all men have to go to the army unless there is a very important reason like mental illness or some kind of handicap. And since we are not at war with anyone right now (and hopefully we will never be) we spent our time doing guard duty, washing dishes and maintaining the camp (cleaning, painting fences, greasing machinery etc) Arma was an imaginary extention of my army years. Good stuff! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Decerto 10 Posted July 19, 2009 I can't get into the army so I'm always looking for the closest I can get and this is cheaper than paintball every weekend! I think most men secretly wish they could be on the battlefield doing something rather than their normal safe boring lives. It used to be a noble thing to be a soldier especially in times of war men would sign on by the hundreds of thousands to experience war but these days it's frowned upon and simulators like this are the only outlet for people who desire to know what it would be like to fight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TangoRomeo 10 Posted July 19, 2009 However i been in german army its kindergarten there anyway ... luckily i was in Mechanised infantery group we had harder training there. Being mainly based on conscription, the regular training a draftee receives accounts for the broad personnel diversity each year. Short service time (9 months), the ever decreasing fitness of playstation generations, and a lack of motivation - do not exactly contribute to quality. Though, draftees don't get deployed, and they're usually not the ones being treated for PTSD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted July 19, 2009 I think most men secretly wish they could be on the battlefield doing something rather than their normal safe boring lives. It used to be a noble thing to be a soldier especially in times of war men would sign on by the hundreds of thousands to experience war but these days it's frowned upon Those are just heroic fantasies. In the old days war was cool because the grim truth was pushed aside by propaganda, how were young men to know what it would really be like? The Great War was the ultimate wakeup for a whole generation, it was made to sound noble and honorable back home but the western front (+ Gallipoli) has to this day been the most inhumane and hellish environment a soldier has ever been sent to, it would be bad business to tell about it to the potential recruits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skippie 10 Posted July 19, 2009 I was in the Royal Artillery Regiment in the Danish army and was in the HQ's medical unit.. I felt that I was wasting my time, counting the stock of medical equipment only to recount it again because there were no other tasks to perform.. Being in the medical unit was extremely boring because when were on drill missions, we had nothing to do and all we did was change positions and setting up camouflage nets and stuff.. If we were to have some practice at our function (I was in a M113 Ambulance, meaning we'd have to drive places to pick up "wounded" guys) it meant that other platoons would have to spare men from their training and they didn't want that.. All in all - my service time was BORING and there were other things I rather would've been doing.. We were asked to go to Iraq, but only very few signed up - I didn't, since I did not believe in that war... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tincup 10 Posted July 19, 2009 There are many recruits and/or volunteers that never see combat. Once you join there is always a chance you will be called upon. In the US men do not have serve, it is by volunteers that we man our armies. With the exception of wartime and then a draft can be called for. I would like to see a one year mandatory service implemented, but that's not likely to happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted July 19, 2009 I would like to see a one year mandatory service implemented, but that's not likely to happen. Why would you want that? The US military is quite capable of defending against any foreign power with its current strength. One year in the military for every able man is a massive blow for the economy and above all it serves no purpose in a country that nobody would dare to invade. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Decerto 10 Posted July 19, 2009 Those are just heroic fantasies. In the old days war was cool because the grim truth was pushed aside by propaganda, how were young men to know what it would really be like? The Great War was the ultimate wakeup for a whole generation, it was made to sound noble and honorable back home but the western front (+ Gallipoli) has to this day been the most inhumane and hellish environment a soldier has ever been sent to, it would be bad business to tell about it to the potential recruits. I know it's a romantic notion, but that is how I feel. I have a BA in History/Psychology, most of it studying military history. Right now I'm studying the American Civil War which was one of the most bloody in history and yet after half my life reading accounts of soldiers I still want to know how it would be like to be in a battle. Back then they called it "going to see the elephant" because it was an experience unlike any other in life and veterans of more recent wars still say that they would live through it again as it was the most defining experience of their lives. There is an alure to war whether morbid or not or else why would we be playing this game in the first place? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BLSmith2112 0 Posted July 19, 2009 ARMA2 for world peace ;) +1 ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricM 0 Posted July 19, 2009 +2 You suddenly realize how easy it is to die... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xtreemjuicyness 10 Posted July 19, 2009 lolage, if i don't find a good enough career b4 im like 18 or 17... ma parents will force me to join the ADF.. but of corse i'll geta good job b4 then.. ive nearly got one.. just so close and its mine... stuff the military aye... would be a awsome exp BTW.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brainmagnet 10 Posted July 19, 2009 I'm a pacifist so this game doesn't influence my feelings towards war. I am not Christian but I believe that the 10 commandments are important ( i.e. thou shall not kill ) and should be followed literally. If heaven exists then you should let yourself and your loved ones perish in the face of violence because then you will inherit a place in heaven, and you won't be contributing to the cycle of violence. I personally believe all wars are B.S. and are just political machinations that only benefit bankers and politicians and defense contractors. War is romanticized by the media b/c bankers politicians and defense contractors are at the top of the pyramid and they need the media to convince people to go against their human nature. The army doesn't only teach you how to kill, it teaches you how to develop a killer instinct. I think life is much more complicated than the comments I make here and my opinion on things is always changing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lauxman 10 Posted July 19, 2009 ^^^ Would you prefer for your countries' servicemen to not be able to kill or have a killer instinct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted July 19, 2009 If heaven exists then you should let yourself and your loved ones perish in the face of violence because then you will inherit a place in heaven, and you won't be contributing to the cycle of violence. Have you ever thought that it's not that simple? Violence can also prevent more violence, i.e. you can kill someone to save lives (one evil minus many evils = good). In my point of view if you let something horrible happen when the means and opportunity to stop it present themselves, it just means that you left your fellow people down and helped make the world a worse place. That's the problem with pacifism: the aggressor can do whatever he wants because his life is more valuable than the people he intends to hurt. If he was equal or less than equal because of his intentions, it would mean that he has the same responsibilities as everyone else and should be stopped if he steps out of line. If the world was pacifist (which won't work unless we are stripped of our free will), it would take a single guy who doesn't follow those ideals to conquer everything and make life a living hell for everyone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brainmagnet 10 Posted July 19, 2009 I would prefer it if no one had the desire to kill, and I think if everyone reasoned that there is no reason to do so we all would be much better off since we wouldn't waste so many resources on developing and using weapons on each other (resources being materials, human lives, time, effort). I think there is more than enough resources to go around in the world. defense contractors make a lot of money developing weapons and selling them to various countries. How does any government justify spending $2 billion dollars on a b-2 bomber? And who benefits from the development and sale of said bomber? The U.S. government spends at least a fifth of its budget on defense spending. If the whole world spent 1% of what it spends on weapons in a year it could send every child on the planet to school (I know this last statistic is a little sketchy I might come back with a detailed figure for this). We would probably have colonized mars by now and have a cure for aids if we put as much effort into those things as we do defense. We should spend more money and effort on diplomacy and leading by setting a shining peaceful example. Defense may still be necessary in this cruel world, but I think it's at the very least over done and there are a few opportunists (psychopaths like Henry Kissinger) that ruin it for the rest of us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cartier90 0 Posted July 19, 2009 Problem is Brain, were animals, literally, with instincts. If I want your land, and will become that much richer from its resources your likely not to give it to me on a silver platter. So what happens then ? Ill come and take it, would you not put up a fight ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brainmagnet 10 Posted July 19, 2009 Ideally I would fight the urge to use violence. In its stead I could use reason and try to convince you not to take my land. If that failed or you just outright attacked me without trying to even negotiate I could evacuate my land taking my valuables and sabotage ( not very creative or good but a counter nonetheless) the land you wished to take. If I had superior technology I could restrict your movements without killing you. I could also convince you to share your land with me in exchange for me sharing my land with you. I think Humans have primitive roots but we have the option to not use violence even if it is threatened upon us. Surrendering to the use of violence is defeat in my mind. There is just lack of education, and indoctrination into the use of violence on this planet. There are many more counters to your argument that I have failed to mention here because I'm not very smart. The way our society works is selfish psychopaths are at the top of the food chain because they do not value anything other than power and since they don't have a moral compass they excel in a material driven society because they are willing to lie cheat and steal when they know they can get away with it. These people coerce others into violence because why would they risk there own hides when they can manipulate others to do so? They control the flow of money and dangle it over our heads like a carrot on a stick. I think the way our society is not going to work this way much longer because it is not a model that can be sustained forever, it is a failed model. That is why the meek shall inherit the Earth. Either way, excellent question Cartier90. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cartier90 0 Posted July 19, 2009 (edited) Cant argue with the sentiment of your point...I think people will eventually be like that, give it a 100 years or so and for genetic engineering to mould acceptable and unacceptable behaviours out of people ( it will happen ! ). Tbh though, few would willingly give up after negotiation, particularly people with the most to lose. I think a major problem is religion - and Im thinking of one in particular. Its why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The truly awful wars are the one we never hear about, look at the Congo - 5 million people dead in the largest conflict since WW2, over what ?.... Edited July 19, 2009 by cartier90 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
An Fiach 10 Posted July 19, 2009 Pacifist is just another word for idealistic idiot. Sure it would be wonderful if the world worked that way, but it doesn't. Religion is not the problem either, just the people who use it for their own personal agendas. It is simply the nature of man and I do not see that anyone would be willing to sacrifice their humanity in order to achieve world peace. If they did, it would mean the end of the human race. It takes a special breed to want to be a soldier and those people all give different reasons for it. It isn't about being fearless or violent. War is the most wonderful and terrible thing you can ever experience. It is something that a silly video game could never prepare you for. VBS is a very useful tool but anyone that uses it to train their troops is a fool and anyone that believes it would be used in that manner is naive to say the least. Its only real practical use in military training is for command and control. Battlefield commanders can utilize it for practicing communications procedures etc. etc. in a simulated battle environment. This saves the military a great deal of expense because they do not have to mobilize an entire battalion or brigade into the field to accomplish their tasks which is very costly, uses munitions that are better used in more important exercises on the small unit level and burns fuel and adds wear and tear on the vehicles and weapon systems Share this post Link to post Share on other sites