Armchair Generals

[Hobbs]

All right. I'm a member of a nation simulation website. Part of the appeal is that you get to act as a leader of a country. In the game, there's very little one can do 'officially' except join the World Assembly (originally the UN, but changed two years ago when the real UN issued a cease and desist order). Most of the actual gameplay is in Role-playing, controlling your 'economy' and 'military.' There are even wars that take place.

Now, most of the nations are controlled by regular people. I understand that not everyone's been in the military etc. But sometimes our RP discussions get into real-life scenarios...meaning, we start discussing tactics and operations in Iraq/Afghanistan etc. I understand people have their opinions and that's fine, but there is one member in particular that routinely lectures me on what US strategy should be, and why we're wrong, blah-blah. This coming from a guy who's never even served and isn't even American (though that's not really an issue). I just hate these people who think they know more than the Joint Chiefs just because they read Clausewitz, Sun Tzu etc and watch the History Channel religiously.

[Bloodsoul]

Send forth all legions.

Do not stop until the city is taken.

Slay them all.
Probably all I need when it comes to strategy...

[Rapscallion]

So, you're saying he shouldn't have freedom of speech?

Rapscallion

[Hobbs]

So, you're saying he shouldn't have freedom of speech?

Rapscallion
Like I said, it's all right to express his opinions, but when you're questioning the people who know what they're talking about, that's a different thing. It's the same as a layman questioning a mechanics decision for a repair, ignoring his professional advice (note: this scenario depicts one where the mechanic is honest).

Besides, it's not like you have freedom of speech on a private website.

[Rapscallion]

Depends on the rules of the private website.

What's wrong with questioning those who know what they're talking about? There may be angles they've not considered. That's how progress occurs.

Rapscallion

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Herein drawing parallels to the 'Telling me how to do my job" (or somesuch similar named) thread. There's a difference between questioning the experts and insisting that they're wrong without basis, experience, etc.

[Hobbs]

Depends on the rules of the private website.

What's wrong with questioning those who know what they're talking about? There may be angles they've not considered. That's how progress occurs.

Rapscallion
I would still insist that my commandant knows more about strategic and operational goals than anyone on this board.

[Rapscallion]

I would still insist that my commandant knows more about strategic and operational goals than anyone on this board.

Is that because he knows it all already and won't change, or because he thought about things and brought new concepts into play?

Rapscallion

[Hobbs]

You're seriously criticizing a USAF major? A guy who's briefed people way past your pay grade?

All right, let's talk about it then. The USAF pretty much puts you through school all the time. Every aspect of your career is on learning and training. He's had more lessons in operational and strategic warfare than you'll ever know. He's sat in on briefings given to the president and Joint Chiefs on the Iraq and Afghanistan War. As a collective, we know more about the war than you'll ever know from watching MSNBC, Fox, CNN and the BBC combined.

[Plaidman]

Its not criticizing a USAF major to question or give adice too. For a better example, say a game everyone has played. chess. There is a guy who plays it everyday, for the past twenty years. He knows pretty much it backwards and forwards. All the deals. All the moves. Are you seriously telling us this chessmaster should never ever ever take any type of advice or answer a question, simply because he done it all his life? Its not like the chessmaster is going to DO said advice, but it shouldnt harm him in anyway to at least ANSWER the why, and to listen to a possible way he never even though of doing. That's how tactics are born. If everyone did the same tactic over and over, the enemy will learn it and counter it like its nothing. Thus time for new tactic. To get new tactics, you have to learn it from a fresh preception, and that usually means someone other then yourself.

[Hobbs]

I want to try and get this back on topic. What I really meant are armchair generals, not random civvies talking about crap they don't know.

[Plaidman]

I want to try and get this back on topic. What I really meant are armchair generals, not random civvies talking about crap they don't know.

I'm pretty sure I am being an armchair general by giving advice to a real general.

[Rapscallion]

You're seriously criticizing a USAF major? A guy who's briefed people way past your pay grade?

No. I'm questioning you.

Tactics and strategies began as, "Ugh, run at other cavemen with pointy sticks." It progressed through the ages by people thinking, "Hang on, if this group of pointy-stick bearers works over here, and this group of pointy-stick get on those four-legged creatures over there and go round the back of their guys, we lose fewer pointy sticks than they do."

Genghis Khan, for example, was quite successful with the Mongol tactic of using fast cavalry in near-suicide missions to attract units of an enemy's force away from their formation for easy destruction.

How did any such alternative methodologies come about without questioning? You seem to have the opinion that your CO is the ultimate strategist and you seem to imply that there's nothing more worth learning.

Rapscallion

[Rapscallion]

I want to try and get this back on topic. What I really meant are armchair generals, not random civvies talking about crap they don't know.

If we 'civvies' don't know what we're talking about, why bring it here in the first place?

Rapscallion

[Plaidman]

I wanna make the remark that if it was Batman who was the general, I'd never question it.

That or Captain America.

But if Batman tells me to jump out of a plane, I'm sure there is a good reason. Because its the goddamn Batman and he knows what he doing with my life.

[Hobbs]

If we 'civvies' don't know what we're talking about, why bring it here in the first place?

Rapscallion

"Only got time for a five-minute rant? Not enough time for a reasoned post? Here you go!"

That's why I posted it here.

I'm not saying my COC is the epitome of strategic tactics. What I'm saying is...laymen who have no education in warfare...who's trump card is "nuke 'em all! Durrrr!" need to stfu about real war. To borrow/paraphrase a quote by Gen. Patton, "...These people know less about war then they do about fornicating!"

Again, I'm talking about laymen here. Genghis Khan wasn't one, neither are the officer's of the US military. To think you know better than them cuz you saw a History Channel special, is just fucking stupid.

[Rapscallion]

Also, be prepared for people to prove you wrong.

Laymen - everyone starts out as a layman.

I'm forty. Most of my formative years and adult life have been spent with small miniatures beating the shit out of each other in Napoleonics, fantasy battles, futuristic battles. These days it's all on computer. Far easier to set up. I think in terms of ability, knowledge, and experience, I get by.

Nukes? SALT limits strikes to countries with nuclear capability, if everyone follows the rules. May want to tell them that.

History channel? I don't own a television. That's a personal choice.

Rapscallion

[Fryk]

So just because your major sat in a bunch of courses while someone talked about military strategy and the like, you assume he was paying attention and absorbed it all?

Ok, lemme switch gears here. That sounds like I'm taking potshots at this particular guy, and I'm not. I'm taking potshots at the idea that someone's skills are unquestionable because they have x rank and went to classes a, b, and c. I'm sure every enlisted man in history can tell you that rank doesn't always correspond to actual command ability. And just because someone is not in the military doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have an innate gift for strategic thinking.

That said, people are going to spout off no matter what you think of their faculties. It's just human nature. We don't know what we don't know (confusing enough? we are ignorant of information that we don't have), so we think that the information we have is sufficient, even when it's not. Nothing you can or should do to stop this.

And as a final thought, if the Joint Chiefs aren't listening to your friend, why should you?

[Hobbs]

Fryk, I respect the enlisted man, and I will agree that when I commission, most if not all of them will have more experience than me. That said, my COC was prior-enlisted. He was recommended for OTS and graduated with flying colors. And while rank may not prove someone's ability, neither does being a random person on a board.

If all you do is play wargames, then you know jackshit about war, especially modern warfare.

As an aside, I consider the Armchair General to be the geeky sidekick of the Weekend Warrior. While I like paintball and airsoft, the ones who think they're SOF when they play it annoy me to no end.

[Rapscallion]

If all you do is play wargames, then you know jackshit about war, especially modern warfare.

I know the consequences of leaving a flank exposed.

I know about patience when conducting a siege.

I know the results of a charge and how many widows it will create.

I've played the bugle - outside of games - at windy cenotaphs in the middle of nowhere on Remembrance Sunday. The Last Post - very evocative. I've seen the expressions on the faces of old soldiers. I've seen the gaps increasing every year.

Try and tell me what I know again.

Rapscallion

[Lachrymose]

You...know...NOTHING!

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/6342/sgt20schultzsmall.jpg

[Hobbs]

I know the consequences of leaving a flank exposed.

I know about patience when conducting a siege.

I know the results of a charge and how many widows it will create.

I've played the bugle - outside of games - at windy cenotaphs in the middle of nowhere on Remembrance Sunday. The Last Post - very evocative. I've seen the expressions on the faces of old soldiers. I've seen the gaps increasing every year.

Try and tell me what I know again.

Rapscallion
All right, you know tactical operations. Now tell me about the difference between operational and strategic goals. Tell me what our greatest threats, strategically, are to the US right now. Can you make an operational and strategic plan for a campaign? So far all you know how to play is Risk or Age of Empires. You don't know shit.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

I think the people Hobbs has a beef with are the ones who're not only pulling shit out of thin air, but also assuming that it's the best of all possible ways to do X Y or Z. There's a difference between bringing a fresh perspective to things and making shit up. You can't truly reform or criticize a system or situation you don't already understand.

Now I'm a big Military enthusiast (Can't and probably wouldn't join, taking orders isn't my style, but I digress) and find it intensely interesting to learn as much as possible about the way a modern military, it's operations, equipment and tactics work. I have a reasonably solid understanding of quite a few facets of modern warfare (from a great number of different sources) and as a result have an opinion on those things, how they might be done better, etc. Which is all well and good IMO. If I get the chance to talk about those things with someone who does have an experience it would be with the intention of learning more, posing questions and getting answers, discussion. "What if the US adopted the ACR?" or "What do you think about the possible uses of Corner-Shot?" that's not the problem. There's nothing wrong about learning about something outside your lifestyle and having opinions.

The problem is with people who hear something on some show along the lines of: "The G36 is a fascinating weapons and super 1337! lololol" and therefore insist that, despite what other, more-qualified people tell them, the Army should adopt the G36. That's not providing a new perspective or having a discussion, that's being an ass.

Similarly, someone who is good at Airsoft or Paintball is free to say "I kick ass at this" or, especially if they have a working knowledge of their skills and what would be required of them "I bet I could make SOF". It's dickheads who think they really are real-world ultimate badasses because they're good at AS or PB.

It's the people who spill over interest and into presumptuous jackassery that are the annoying ones.

Am I close?

[Hobbs]

Well-said Wingates. I've noticed your avatar and sig, so I hoped I had put across my point of what I meant by AS and PB.

You're quite correct; I don't mind if you bring a relatively good point to the table...it's the ones who go, "Noes! You need bio-weapons and nukes and you need to use 'em!!Eleventy!" They think of nothing besides the big picture, which is exactly what operational and strategic goals are for.

[Rapscallion]

I think the people Hobbs has a beef with are the ones who're not only pulling shit out of thin air, but also assuming that it's the best of all possible ways to do X Y or Z. There's a difference between bringing a fresh perspective to things and making shit up. You can't truly reform or criticize a system or situation you don't already understand.

Oh, I completely appreciate that. However, what interested me is that Hobbs immediately seemed to think that I did the armchair generaling just because I pointed out that as one of the inconvenient civilians of the world I did have somewhat more knowledge than the average hoorah on the street. I generally don't do the armchair generalling because of what I've learned.

Rapscallion

[Hobbs]

Pardon, but your previous posts made it presumable that you were an armchair general. Plus, civvies, even the "knowledgeable" ones, don't really know what they're talking about. No offense, Wingates, but it's not like you get the best news/updates from watching news organizations or reading papers.

[Rapscallion]

Well, we've just found out what presumption does, haven't we?

Hmm, apparently I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not in the armed forces. Great argument. A surefire winner in debate.

Rapscallion

[Wingates_Hellsing]

It's not really an argument so much as a statement. Simply put, if you aren't an active member in any military, chances are you're simply too far removed from the situation compared to those who are to have a thorough understanding of the mechanics involved.

We live in the information age, and it goes without saying that there's plenty to be had. But that's not enough to make me an expert IT manager any more than a Colonel in the army. It's possible to know plenty without 'field experience' but to be an expert anything less just doesn't cut it. Experience is the only way to truly understand any job, a rule of thumb if ever there was one.

While the phrase '____s don't know what they're talking about' may be a smidge on the hyperbole side, it's nevertheless correct. The best statement, IMO, would be to say:

"Civilians don't know what they're talking about compared to professional Soldiers."

And even then it leaves out all those shades of gray. (Like the different branches, ranks etc. in the military or the people who're technically civilians whose job it is to understand the military, what they're position is etc.)

P.S. No offense taken, Hobbs, though you'd be surprised how good the information can be once one realizes they have to go look for it. (With the exception of the military channel on discovery, there's good stuff there as well)

[Hobbs]

Wingates, you answered it perfectly. No civilian can say they know more than the JCS, unless they're *GS-3000 or what-have-you.

*a civilian government employee. If you're in the intelligence industry, this is your rank/status...though 3000 is a fanciful figure.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Wingates, you answered it perfectly. No civilian can say they know more than the JCS, unless they're *GS-3000 or what-have-you.

*a civilian government employee. If you're in the intelligence industry, this is your rank/status...though 3000 is a fanciful figure.

There's also the tiny matter where so much of the higher-echelon information one would need to know as much as the JCS and/or the Gs-big-number falls into that whole 'classified' category.

also, thanks :D

[Hyena Dandy]

It seems to me, that this problem is easily resolved. Since you're clearly more knowledgeable on tactics, instead of calling this guy an idiot, you can explain why things aren't done that way, and that way he might actually learn something, and revise his opinion. He'll never learn to think of things properly if everyone dismisses him instead of trying to instruct him.

[Hobbs]

I've tried on several occasions. Even when I quote briefings I've been in, he's apparently more knowledgeable than I or those over me.

[Hyena Dandy]

Alright, read the thread. Hobbs, I do think you misinterpreted a lot of what Rapscallion said. Rapscallion certainly wasn't saying he knew better than you. What he did say was that he does have at least a basic idea of things, and therefore is better off than a normal civilian. So civilians don't necessarily know NOTHING, they're just less likely to be properly informed. That said, I've met professional soldiers who ALSO think that they should just nuke 'em all.

The main thing, from your post, is that the guy you're dealing with is completely focused on the MILITARY aspect of things, and there's more than just weaponry and tactics to war. There's psychology, for example, and engineering. As the song says, war is a science. But in the end, what I think needs to be done about that guy is either

A) Ignore him.

or, if you can't,

B) Don't say anything about why you know it, because that distracts from the point. The guy seems to think he knows everything, so what you have to do isn't say you know better, because he won't be convinced. He's too confident. Phrase your objections in the form of questions, because if he knows everything, he'll surely think he knows the answer, and if he doesn't, he'll have to come up with an answer. That way he'll learn. "Oh, we CAN'T nuke 'em all, because X, Y, Z." If you act the way towards him that you have on this thread, towards Rapscallion, you're never going to make him LEARN anything, because you're starting with "I know better, because I was told X." If you remove yourself, your commander, your profession, etc. from the equation completely, you're more likely to be able to convince him to see your side of the equation.

By bringing yourself, your experiences, etc. into the matter, you're making his stupidity personal to both him and yourself. If you distance yourself from the question

At least, that's what I'd do. But I'm just an armchair psychologist. :P

And finally, and perhaps the most important point I have to make.






What's your Nationstate called?

[Hobbs]

I think you've misinterpreted. I'm not talking about Raps at all. I thought you were referencing the person in my OP.

You're an NSer? My nation is Free United States. Region: Nasicournia

[Nyoibo]

So far all you know how to play is Risk or Age of Empires. You don't know shit.


Hmm, apparently I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm not in the armed forces. Great argument. A surefire winner in debate.

Rapscallion

So does it change things if I mention that my grandfater was a Brigadier, my father was in the military, I know several officers up to a Colonel?

[Hobbs]

So does it change things if I mention that my grandfater was a Brigadier, my father was in the military, I know several officers up to a Colonel?
No, it doesn't. Unless, of course, you've been taught strategic and operational military tactics from them. Then I might be inclined to entertain your ideas.

[Hyena Dandy]

I think you've misinterpreted. I'm not talking about Raps at all. I thought you were referencing the person in my OP.

You're an NSer? My nation is Free United States. Region: Nasicournia


Oooh, no, no, you've misinterpreted me. The second part was about the other guy, the first part was about raps. The long breaks





Like this mean I've gone onto a new topic. :3

short breaks like this are a new paragraph on the same topic. Just how I write. The second bit was about him, though, if you want to convince a guy like that, you need to feed into his fantasy. Its gonna be asking, not telling, that'll convince him he doesn't know anything.

[Hobbs]

ah, gotcha

[Hyena Dandy]

ah, gotcha

Sorry about that. I get how it can be confusing. No hard feelings. :3