Would raising children from birth to become soldiers make for

>>29709061
Because the Spartans were an uncivilized military state

>>29709093
that doesn't answer the question

>>29709061
>why don't we do it today?
Free country. Do whatever you want.

Why don't we select people's professions at birth?

Think of a job you'd absolutely fucking loathe. Complete with significant risks of injury. Congratulations, that's the one that's been decided for you. You'll be doing that for your entire life. Don't like it? Sucks to be you.

>>29709061
Probably, but the curriculum wouldn't be all beatings and privation.
Like most jobs, well rounded and adjusted individuals tend to perform better.

>>29709121
but the state will cease to exist if they get invaded by another country willing to create SPARTAN style super soldiers

>>29709061
new chapter, where

>>29709097
Yeah it does. Because individual thought is valued (at least somewhat) more than service to the state. Also, there's that whole "child labor" thing. Also, pretty sure using children in war is considered a war crime

>>29709061
ITT: how slave revolts happen

>>29709061
They would definitely be better soldiers but they wouldn't be a one man army, in the end you wouldn't be able to utilize them in a way that would justify spending all those resources on them

Its like with female soldiers, you would pour thousands of dollars into them but they wouldn't improve enough for it to matter

Because we found that we get more out of a military that isn't founded on the existence of a slave class. You see, the Spartan system worked in many ways because the Spartans could use the helots as target practice and as slaves that would keep their ridiculously aristocratic society functioning.

Nowadays, a caste of soldiers would be quite the opposite. A slave caste fighting the wars of a mercantile class that gets to have an education and high living standards without needing to fight.

Needless to say, this would not work out very well.

capable grunts isn't what wins a modern war

>>29709061
Actually, it's very likely you would end up with WORSE soldiers.

Nowdays, a few years of training would give you a damn good soldier perfectly capable of fulfilling any battlefield role.
And while training children from birth would make them SOMEWHAT better, the advantage would be quite neglectable, as in today's battlefield not that much is determined by characteristics of your soldiers, beyond having basic competence and will to fight.

But the issue will be that coming from a predetermined and VERY regimented background, these "perfect soldiers" will have serious troubles adopting unorthodox innovations in armaments and tactics and facing realpolitik issues of warfare.

>>29709450
Not if they are trained in unorthodox tactics

the classic infantry soldier is pretty much dead at this point. That's why they are letting women into those roles.

A woman would never conceivably fight in a Greek phalanx or Roman legion, they simply were not physically capable of it.

And while the physical demands on infantry are still high, the role they play in the battlefield has never been smaller.

So if you want to raise a soldier today, raise a computer programmer or video game enthusiast; these are the types of skills the new military will require.

>>29709451
No.

The thing is - modern soldier is very resourceful since he has experience of shifting his ways of thinking. He used to be Mama's Little Puffypants, then he was a loner nerd at school, then he was a popular jackass in the college, then he was a skilled misanthropic coder in a corporate environment, and then he became a grunt. A modern professional/drafted soldier was all of these things, and he can still think like all of them. That gives him a LOT more insight, creativity and adaptability than someone whose been a soldier all his conscious life can have.

A "perfect soldier" will feel a lot more comfortable under fire, but our grunt, while not so comfortable, will still be able to do his job. And while facing other issues, like improvising equipment, connecting with locals in a foreign campaign, patching up holes in arbitrary tactics, et cetera - our grunt will fare infinitely better, since he is used to treading unfamiliar ground and combining experiences.

>>29709475
>So if you want to raise a soldier today, raise a computer programmer or video game enthusiast; these are the types of skills the new military will require.
T O P K E K
O
P
K
E
K

>>29709498
>>29709475
furthermore I see the big militaries of the world moving permanently away from intense counter-insurgency warfare. That's because the only real way to challenge a superpower is to bog them down in an insurgency. Countries like China and Russia have already learned this lesson; the US is learning this lesson the hard way.

>>29709397
why would they be a slave caste?

spartans didn't have guns

>>29709490
What makes you think they will grow up sterile of personalit or individual experiences?

These kids wouldn't be put in isolation, they would be average kids in average lives with some extra PT and tactics training from a young age

>>29709594
>What makes you think they will grow up sterile of personalit or individual experiences?
I didn't say "personality or individual experiences", I said that their whole life experience would be that of a singular environment - military.

>they would be average kids in average lives
Average kids go to average schools with average children with average interests and average ambitions and no predetermined future. Just a military school already pulls a person quite outside the society, and that doesn't give much extra results, so you gotta need to go deeper.

>>29709639
The schools would be regular schools with extra military stuff added

Kids would grow and experience life exactly as before but they would be more fit and have a better understanding of military history and tactics while doing it, they would be more efficient at dealing with problems, even unique problems better than average people because they would have been doing it for a lot longer

File: image.jpg (214KB, 900x696px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 900x696px

>>29709061
You get this

>>29709730
>The schools would be regular schools with extra military stuff added
Military boarding schools already exist you autistic hermaphrodite. Their graduates are more likely to go into military and feel better there, but pretty much all of them end up as officers and don't show any extraordinary performance there.

>>29709061
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uRr77vju8U

British TV documentary filmed in September 1993 about young boys starting boarding prep school. The earliest example of a TV documentary about "modern" boarding.

>>29709061
The average american infantryman would fucking murder a Spartan slave warrior any day of the week. Would it make them better if they were trained from birth? Better athletes perhaps.

>>29709823
Patton is a good example of raised for soldiering from birth.

The average US infantryman has about as much potential as any other peasant. It is about quality officers without which things just decend to victoryless peasants clubbing each other in mud.

>>29709804
And that's completely separate from what the op is talking about, the kids don't get shipped off, the whole society sets just gets extra training when they are young, sperg

You still need doctors and farmers and everyone else, everyone would live exactly like they did before except for some extra curricular activities,

File: 1443746377784.jpg (77KB, 366x380px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 366x380px

>>29709844
>And that's completely separate from what the op is talking about, the kids don't get shipped off

>Would raising children from birth to become soldiers make for better soldiers, like what the spartans did?

>the whole society sets just gets extra training when they are young, sperg

>raising children from birth to become soldiers

> some extra curricular activities

>like what the spartans did

>>29709134
>heavy implications

>>29709844
http://www.boardingschoolsurvivors.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Leaving-home-pdf.pdf

"Our stoicism needed no promotion by the staff; it was one
of those unwritten and virtually unspoken mores which
nevertheless is fully understood by each member of the
community. Everyone’s self respect was at stake: if one boy
blubbed, the others would be poignantly reminded of their
own unhappiness and brought dangerously close to blubbing
themselves. He had therefore to be repressed at all costs ...
This was the beginning of that process by which our feelings
were first numbed and then disconnected, giving us the
distinctive quality of the boarding-school ‘man’."

>>29709878
That was exactly what the British Empire and to a lesser extent the US and west point do.

>>29709874
Op isn't talking about adopting the spartans system of government, philosophy and training, just training children to be soldiers

Learn to context, autist

File: Perhaps-Arantxa-Rus-thought-her-skirt-provided-more-coverage-than-it-actually-did..jpg (36KB, 450x529px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 450x529px

>>29709874
afaik the Spartan military was like an entirely separate country, who demanded the wealth of the real "Spartan" country who did all the damn work, feeding and clothing them.

Yet the military class would still come around to murder and bully the non-military class once in a while.

OP's idea is like welfare queen heaven.
>Oh boy! I can't wait to fuck off innawoods all day and not have to worry about anything other than shooting!

>>29709061
You might as well do this for all state agents. Have kids grow up as spies, snipers, prison guards, scientists, etc. And include a system where you'll reward a kid for doing good so he will get better, push him in a direction where he's most useful.

...ah, right. Like normal schools.

Would be cool to waterboard them every day though, to harden them against torture if they are ever captured.

>>29709916
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r75ajf6UEhU

Eton College Documentary (1991)
.

Army:

The Army syllabus includes basic land-based military skills such as weapon handling, army formations, tactics and living in the field. During training, other skills are developed such as navigation, team work and leadership. The clear rank structure in the Army section offers cadets the opportunity to progress up the ranks as a result of commitment and improvement in military knowledge.

http://www.britishpathe.com/video/eton-college-otc

Titles read: 'Eton. Eton College OTC - inspected by HRH the Duke of Connaught.'

Berkshire.

Duke of Connaught, accompanied by military officers and schoolmaster in long black gown and mortar board, walks through gates in grounds of Eton College.

Several shots of the Duke inspecting young men of the Eton Officer's Training Corps.

Intertitle reads: 'HRH Prince Leopold of Belgium'.

And where did all that special training get the Spartans? Sure they had a tough reputation, but the Athenians could still take them in a fight, and the Macedonians conquered them all pretty easily. The whole badass Spartan thing is a bit of a meme, individual toughness won't help in the grand scheme of things, not when strategy, technology, logistics, etc are all taken into account.

>>29710007
It helps in early mental formation. A form of inoculation for PTSD and profound indoctrination into rank structure and leadership..

>>29709159
I believe OP is asking why we aren't disregarding today's society and doing this because it can strengthen us as a race/nation/whatever

>>29710027

>profound indoctrination into rank structure and leadership

Sounds like a recipe for an authoritarian state to me. Tbh this kind of thing is basically what the Nazis did with the Hitler Youth.

>>29709134
>yeah, but if this fictional video game suddenly became real, then THINGS could HAPPEN

File: 1461367380821.jpg (94KB, 800x670px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x670px

>>29709910
wow, it's just like the football team or any sports team stealing all the budget from schooling and leaving scraps amongs any other club to fend each other for it...

>>29709159
it is a war crime.
however your points are pretty spot on.
>>29709061
it would be ineffective amd costly. First you would have to feed, clothe and raise the kid. You could mitigate some costs by taking older children, but up till the teens kids grow retarded fast, uniforms and training gear would have to keep up.
Then there is the attrition rate, anyone who dies or otherwise fails the program has been a waste of supplies and money.
lets not forget doctors and engineers, if everyone is being trained to fight, there is little to no room for your society to develope STEM feilds. Yeah strength is great, but the wooly mammoth was killed off by a smarter species.

and finally population. Where are the Spartans now? While their culture sounds badass, what the movies leave out is that the Spartans are no more. They didnt suffer a massive defeat, they just stopped reproducing. Those that wanted kids, left so that they wouldnt risk their child being chucked off a cliff. if we were to do soething similar today, I suspect we would have a similar result.

>>29709894
Because you'd be forcing people into training for a profession before they are mentally capable of making said decision for themselves.
>what is "freedom"
If people want to be soldiers, then they can make that decision once they're adult enough to do so.
And don't fucking tell me that it's just "school with some extra stuff." We already have ROTC. So no, I'm not going to let someone take my kids off to become perfect little warriors because some fat crusty asshole watched 300 once and thought "hey, this looks breddy gool."

Sparta doesn't exist anymore, because they're system of military indoctrination was completely retarded, as is anyone who tries to recreate it.

>>29709061
>Would raising children from birth to become soldiers make for better soldiers, like what the spartans did?

What do you think the knightly class was? The son of that class would learn field craft starting at age 7, horsemanship at age 9, and start working on swordsmanship around 10 or 11.

> If yes, why don't we do it today?

Poor cost to benefit returns starting in the late 15th century forwards. Tactics started to move to a lower needed amount of training need to be useful and did not stop till doing that till a bit before WW1.

>>29709061
>Would raising children from birth to become soldiers make for better soldiers, like what the spartans did?
go watch "Soldier" with Kurt Russel

>>29709061
The spartans werent really THAT much better warriors than other greeks. People tend for forget that they got thier asses beat about as often as they won.

By the time alexander the great came along they were already a primitive backwater with over-weight outdated gear and clumsy plodding tactics.

Alexander's men with lighter armour, longer spears, smaller shields, and actual battle drill and manuever utterly fucked their static phalanx in the ass.

>>29709573
"Why would the people forced from birth to be a soldier with no say in the matter and no freedom to make any of thier own life choices be considered slaves?"

Is that what you are asking? Think about it for a minute.

the spartans relied so much on slaves due to the men having to justify all their training and waging war all the time

>>29710388
This.

It only takes 13 weeks to take your average idiot highschooler and have him marching, obeying orders, hitting targets at 500 yards, and be basically trained and equipped for military service.

It only takes about 8 weeks of infantry school to teach said basically trained individual infantry tactics and skills.

And then, just because we have the time and money, you send him to his unit for 6 to 8 months of field training and mentoring by his superiors before deploying him, but like I said, that only happens cuz we can afford it.

SHTF our government can indoctrinate, train, and deploy an infantryman to current standards in about 6 months, though it can be much much less if standards are lowered.


Point is, paying tens of thousands a year to care for kid for years and years until he could finally serve doesnt really give you all that much of a benifit when you can get what you need in a few months instead.

Plus our military found out during Nam that having soldiers who actually WANTED to join is far better than conscripted slave soldiers.

>>29710587
This.

A society maxes out on soldier/to civvy ratios when around 30% of the military aged males are enlisted.

The spartans were able to get away with it because
A) women were expected to work the fields and whatnot
B) they had slave labour
C) they had an incredibly strict caste system tat ensured every person in society had a designated place.


It all came back to bite them on the ass in the end though. Thier society became too rigid and ended up becoming static, everything became about preserving the status quo instead of advancing.

Eventually they were taking to the field of battle with weapons and tactics centuries out of date, and thier society didnt have an economy to speak of so they couldnt field large professional forces of modern infantry, they could just trot out these guys in antique gear who performed a ritualized version of combat that was no longer relevant on modern battlefields.

Military caste's tend to stagnate a culture. Having a big sepwration between government, civilian, and military creates an inherently unstable society, but unstability is why we went from horses and steam engines to landing on the moon in only a 70 year span.

Military societies tend to become dogmatic and obsessed with tradition to the point where you have samurai class like leaders rejecting new weapons and technologies for no other reason than its new.

>>29710736
well someone has to pay for the kid anyway

>>29709061
>If yes, why don't we do it today?
Because we don't want super-soldiers, we want passive consumer drones who can be distracted by mindless entertainment and easily manipulated with propaganda. Citizens who are fiercely loyal to their nation and to one another and fearless warriors? What do you want to do, collapse muh diverse globalist society?

>>29709134
More likely those noble, super-soldiers would just be blown to bits by some fat guy at a desk clicking buttons on his drone Xbox, but point taken.
>>29709450
This too. The Spartans were infamously conservative in their tactics. Unmatched in set Phalanx battles, but slow to grasp naval and siege warfare. Their upbringing was intended to make them ideal infantry troops for a now long-obsolete form of combat.
Also consider the success of the Romans, who started training at 17 with much more sophisticated battle formations, or the Vikings, who had very little formal training but grew up handling weapons and ships.

>>29710802
Great post.
Aristotle also pointed out that the constant warfare and barracks life left women and their slaves running much of society's practical affairs, which in his view they did very poorly. He described Spartans as "ruled by their wives" and cites this as one of the causes for their decline.

>>29710941
In essence, aristotle was pointing out the flaws with a crude form of socialism.

Instead of free market economies the spartans simply dictated where resources went, they never even had a currency or liquid asset wealth.

The utterly rigid structure was such that literally everything was dictated by government, for example, sparta's warrior culture was way big into the greek stoic ideals, except they took it to a retarded level. Opulence was so reviled that even the number of strikes with an ax to carve a roof beam was regulated, ya know, in case somebody makes a prettier roof beam than somebody else and gets to feeling too high and mighty.

And there is another issue with warrior societies, they are always at fuckin war. Like always.

In sparta this meant that while a guy was out fighting (usually just to get more slaves to compensate for thier shitty stagnated economy) thier slaves, women, and old men were running everything.

This is no redpill douchebro statement that follows, its the hisoric truth, young men are the driving energy that advances a society. The spartans literally kept thier young men in a perpetual state of war, training, and more war. Only old men were leaders, and so thier entire culture never advanced.

No new methods for forging metals were developed, new tactics and weapons were almost heresy, no new technologies were invented because nobody was free to do so, and even if they were, no free market economy to reward them for it so why bother?

In literally every warrior cult/society this has happened, the spartans essentially painted themselves into a corner because they couldnt diversify thier interests.

By the end they were just a bunch of muscular autists standing in static phalanx boxes obsessivley polishing thier bronze gear while everyone else was runnin around with steel and manuever warfare tactics.

>>29709884
Let's not talk about British boarding schools.

This is a system where elder pupils are both expected and given the power to anally rape their juniors. It should be treated as the outlier that it is.

>>29712313
Imagine the russian ones.

>>29712313
Strangley enough, most mentoring practices in most societies similar to boarding schools or military schools seem to revolve around older males secluding young boys and having sex with them.

It was common, even encouraged, in ancient greece for a young male to be assigned to a mentor who would both educate, train, and butt-fuck him.

>>29709061
>like what the Spartans did?
do you see any Spartans around?
Did you ever heard of the great world wide empire of Spartans?
raising kids to be soldiers from birth is one of those ideas that make dictators cum buckets, but we don't had those on any real world power and they do just fine.
PROFESSIONAL soldiers are the best answer brainwashed, socially challenged, mentally unstable child soldiers are proved to be nothing but prone to commit war crimes and be killed by drones.

>>29709061

>why don't we do it today?

Because contrary to all the fellation they get from people that think a society almost entirely based around military service is the best society possible the Spartans weren't even particularly effective in their own age. They got their asses handed to them plenty, even by the less "badass" Greeks that they were supposedly so much better warriors than.

Beyond that people aren't robots. If you raise a kid to only know one thing he's not going to necessarily enjoy that one thing or have the passion it takes to innovate on that one thing. He's just going to completely lack any other experiences. We have a pretty good system in concept. You've got the lower ranks open to allow for quick and easy replenishment of troops and you've got the higher ranks for people that have taken legitimate interest in the military and decided to focus on it professionally with some mobility in between to bridge the two. If you could cut out the political bullshit it'd be pretty much perfect.

>>29712946
In spartan society nobody was free to go "uh, hey, guys, remember how the argos whipped our asses with thier navy and amphibious landing? Maybe we should try to figure out how to do that"

Or "hey, that kid from macedon found out that by lightening equipment and actually manuevering he could just roll right through our static phalanx, maybe we could try that."

In fact suggesting such ideas would probably result in mockery, exile or punitive measures.

The spartans were considered backwards and ignorant in thier own time.

Oh, for the first few centuries when greece was still a big pile of city states and chiefdomes thier methods of seasonally raiding thier neighbors and then boxing up into a heavily armoured shield wall and riding out the counter attack worked fine.

Then the greeks discovered manuever warfare from the persians and combined the heavy shock infantry tactics and equipment native to greece with fast paced (for thier era) manuevers and sparta quickly began getting whipped like a red headed stepchild.

Spartan hoplite's gear was too heavy to really manuever in. All they could do was box up and stand thier ground, which made it easy for the macedonians, who wore 40 pounds less armour, and carried a spear roughly twice to 3 times longer.

Infantry up the middle, cavalry on the outside, and a reserve of both that could be rapidly sent into wherever they were needed.
Fucking slaughtered everyone in that era, and thier manuevers flowed around the heavy ponderous almost static traditional hoplites.

The alexandrian ideas were almost the perfect military for its era. Heavy enough to smash through lightly armed but fleet footed persians, but fleet footed enough themselves to flow around heavily armed and armoured opponents.


The spartans were so dogmatic and stagnant that even when they were getting dick-whipped on a seasonal basis they would utterly refuse to change anything.

>>29709061
Spartans raised their children to be gay socially inept slavers and not soldiers.

The moment enemy armies started targeting their soldiers instead of the soldiers of their allies (due to some wierd tradition regarding formations they didn't do this for 2 centuries) Spartans were getting BTFO.

>>29709061
Having spartan-like programs for children only to have them grow up into soldiers is absolutely insane. You would raise an entire class of people useless to the outside world, basically NEETS but with guns. They would also be virtually impossible to replace timely. Basically this idea is bad and there is a very clear-cut reason why volunteer and conscript armies are used instead.

Imagine this, you've just spent 20 years feeding and training a soldier who might only get used in combat once, and who is just as likely to die from a mortar strike as anyone else.

>>29714049
Guns and industrialized warfare signed the death certificate for warrior castes.

Say, you have this kid, hes the son of a noble/knight/big-wig.

From age 10 you begin teaching him swordsmanship, horsmanship, the lance, literacy, mathematics, politics etc etc.

You pay for his clothing, his food, his education, weaponry, battle mount, everything.

So now he is finally 18, and is knighted. You have just spent a decade and enough to outfit a company of men at arms just to have this fuckin kid who hasnt even seen real combat yet, at best he carried extra shields and lances next to his liege, but probably not even that.

His first battle some smelly illiterate peasant who is missing half his teeth and probably only gets to eat meat once a year if that looks down the barrel of a crude arquebus, essentially just an iron tube stuffed with crude black powder and a chunk of lead. His yellowed and scurvy ridden fingers touch a smouldering twig to a crudeley hacked out touch hole, there is a puff of smoke, a dull thud, and your big fancy pants well fed and educated expensive knight educatedbefore he could kill even one man in the enemy army.

If you read history firearms democratized combat. Suddenly it didnt matter how downtrodden and poor you were, you had the potential to kill anyone of any station. All you needed was crude iron, or even just bronze, some wood, salt-peter, sulphur, and charcoal and you were as lethal as any other combatant no matter how well trained or equipped he was.

Lords were forced to stockpile guns in as large a number as possible, the emerging free market economy meant early gunsmiths were free to develope increasingly cheaper and more effective guns, and war fighting finally became a serious undertaking for the common man.

Conscripts drafted and trained in only a few weeks replaced expensive nobility based units as the heavy hitters of battle, and lords and monarchs increasingly had to focus on making thier populace happy
Contd

>>29714763
After guns became available, an unhappy populace could rise up. Unlike peasant rebellions in the past armed with only farm tools and captured weapons they lacked the years of training to properly use, any average joe could be as lethal as any other if he could figure out how to pack a fistful of gravel into a tube on top of some black powder.

Over time this fact evolved and our founding fathers realized war-making wasnt just the realm of nobles and monarchs, it was any mans perogative to be lethal, and an explosion of democratically minded rebellions occurred. Monarchies fell and government became enslaved as a servant to an armed civilian populace.

In short, guns didnt just kill the idea of a warrior class as a direct enforcer tool of a tyrannical government, it enabled modern democracy and served as a catalyst to advance society to its current position.

In other words, guns created the world we know today and is the exact reason why a ruling council of wealthy landlords are unable to steal our children from thier cribs and enslave them for life as a savage dog of war loosed as often to control the populace as they are to despoil and raid the enemy for the sole gain of a few well entrenched noble rulers.

>>29709376
This mostly.
Eiither you base your whole economy on war and conquer, or your plan will not justify the costs, since no matter how much you drill a guy from birth on, he won't become a one man Rambo-style (or other movies) army and it only takes some bad luck, bullet/shrapnel in the wrong place, and your huge investment is ruined.

>>29709061
Discipline without intellect is useless anon.

File: I like these posts. They sound correct and may have some faulty points but the whole thing is pretty much right.png (79KB, 1409x833px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1409x833px

>>29714049
>>29714763
>>29714830

>>29714908
The one man army trope is so overrated, and quit being relevant as soon as the ability to swing a sword became obsolete.

In modern infantry tactics the weakest guy can kill the strongest rambo type dude by mereley squeezing a trigger. And modern infantry tactics are going to change even more radically in the coming decades.

Soon morbidly obese computer nerds are going to be wiping out enemy infantry squads with remote controlled drones via satellite uplink from thier air conditioned offices in utah. I mean they already are doing that (and being awarded combat decorations and claiming PTSD) but that tech is really going to take off and soon even dipshit countries will have that capability.

It already costs almost $100k just to train and deploy a modern infmoderman in a few months time. Imagine paying hundreds of thousands per year for a decade and a half just so this guy can lose both his legs to a $50 IED fighting for some stupid political bullshit that becomes irrelevant all of 3 years down the road.

>>29714958
For the record, I am a marine just returning from Iraq, and am I am utterly hammered for the first time in 8 months. I had to stop typing to go throw up while writing that.

>>29715025
>I am a marine just returning from Iraq,
Eh why were you coming back from Iraq? I may be a slowpoke here but didnt the US pull out the troops from that region and now have only special forces and other guys instead of boots on the ground?

>>29709093
And they got rekted.

>>29709134
Nazis Germany didn't fare too well when it tried that tactic last time I checked

>>29715279
Eh... long story short some navy seals wanted a few extra bodies to help them out. I have combat expierience and have done similar work with MARSOC, so I was asked to go.

I understand anything containing the words "navy SEAL" is going to illicit eye rolling and disbelief, but I'll be upfront. We werent operators, they were. We just came along on stuff to set up cordons, provide site security during important meetings, and various other tasks within our abilities that they didnt have time for.

But also to answer your question, we do have boots on the ground over there, they just arent conducting ops yet. Mostly securing the bases that will be used in case we do see a troop surge.

Glad I wasnt part of that though, standing endless post guarding abandoned facilities that may or may not even see use sounds retarded. I have 2 prior combat deployments and have been lucky enough to be part of the main effort for both of them.

In military terms, that means I havent ever had to stand post or do dumb shit, instead I got to kick in doors duriot raids and clear out villages n shit.

Its been a good run but that era is over, atleast for the time being so im getting out.

Being allowed to go help out the SEALs was a reward for services rendered and probably the most entertaining and rewarding thing I ever did. They are great guys and im glad I can end my career on such a positive note. Also got to play with some neat toys and recieve some great training. Youd think navy SEALs would be all grim and scary but they are actually incredibly awesome bros who are very humble and a big pleasure to work with. I guess its like, they got nothing to prove and just wanna get the job done and have a good time. Made some awesome friends.

>>29709061
Wasting that much time and money on something you aren't using is bad for the state. Look at best Korea

Doing that would take so much time and resources, and people doing it would be accused of crimes against humanity.

People are the most expensive and important military asset but there are criminal lines people don't want to cross because they would be strung up for it.

File: american freedom smug.jpg (272KB, 953x1200px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 953x1200px

>>29715457
Very interesting, thank you.

>>29709061
Do you want institutionalized rape, because this is how you get institutionalized rape.

>>29709061
>Manga about child soldiers.
>Again

In the end it is what they are, not how they are thought. Depending on what you do they can be african war orphans or formidable volksturm.

>>29709498
The first part isn't wrong in the slightest. What, did you think the military was even MOSTLY combat troops?

>>29710873
>More likely those noble, super-soldiers would just be blown to bits by some fat guy at a desk clicking buttons on his drone Xbox, but point taken.
this

>>29709775
Die for the emperor or die trying.

Punishment for not dying, is death.

Naturally DKoK are clones. Not clones as in "lol dna here have a clone" but as in "we harvest a fuckload of eggcells and a fuckload of sperm, by force because we do that" and the result is a fuckload of test tube chilluns. Taught to die. Or die trying.