Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If its an Ultramarine he would probably drop his weapons and allow himself to be taken into custody by local authorities(knowing he could kill them and escape at anytime) so he can try to figure out wtf is going on. but then the government would probably step in and try to disect him and reverse engineer his armor and weapons at which time he would have to make a daring escape and probably end up making friends with a child or a good looking woman who helps him get away. Then he would probably put himself into stasis in a secret location until he is accidently awoken by kids playing near their village in a post apocalyptic future where roving gangs of techno barbarians pillage and punder. He fights off an army of techno barbarians but dies after he kills their leader and saves the village and the children. so basically it would be like E.T. and Soldier.

 Selym wrote:
Because this guy will have a gun and probably a feth hueg combat blade/chainsaw. Someone (probably the police) will try to disarm him. He won't drop the gun, so they'll be forced to use some "force" to make him drop his weapons.

You think police will try to disarm someone holding a chainsword and a futuristic blocky rifle with as imposing a figure as an Astartes? Lets assume I'm a smart person, the way I see it, I would try to establish a form of communication between him first. Do you disagree?

Ernestas wrote:


A lot of strange and disturbing stuff about war, culture and politics.

I have read your post very carefully because I do not want to misrepresent your statements due to the fact that English is not your primary language.

Much of what I can make out I do find to be disturbing or just based on a really naive understanding of history and current events.
.

Ernestas wrote:

Recent conflicts just highlights how finite our patient and resources for war are. Due to that, we lack balls to properly do that's right if needed.

It is not clear who exactly who you mean by "we". If you mean western nations in the conflict in the middle east then you really have zero comprehension of the resources spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by the USA. All the money wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan in these protracted conflicts that will ultimately achieve nothing has meant tremendous sacrifice in lives and casualties. Billions and billions of dollars have been wasted that could have been used for medicine, education, nutrition world wide environmental and scientific research and humanitarian aid to victims of natural disasters.

Now, if by "we" you mean humans in general, then one must not only consider the resources of treasure and lives spent by the western powers but also the sacrifices our enemies, the insurgents and terrorists are willing to spend. The fanatics are willing to kill themselves, innocent civilians and other noncombatants and turn their homeland into a true post apocalyptic wasteland rather than surrender.

I think it is clear that present day humans are very aggressive, violent and warlike. Killing each other is probably our most refined skill and we are better at it now than ever.

Ernestas wrote:

We keep failing at military conflicts which ones are more serious or different and that speaks poorly of us.

You do not really provide any examples but then again you misunderstand the nature of war and recent conflicts. The USA military for example is quite capable and willing to win virtually any conflict of arms. The failure comes from the fact that the political goals that were hoped to be achieved by military power were stupid and unachievable. We crushed the Iraq army but could not achieve the impossible goal of forcing people to adopt democratic ideals and abandon their medeival fundamentalist religion. We defeated the Taliban government of Afghanistan, drove Al Quidea out of Afghanistan and then tried to achieve the impossible nonmilitary goal of dragging Afghanistan out of the middle ages.

As far as humans in general failing to reach your own standard of warrior culture, dont you see the logical contradiction of your claim? If one group loses a conflict then obviously another group of humans did whatever it takes to win the conflict.

You bring up the Vietnam war but I doubt that you have the first clue that it was born of the French wanting to re-establish their imperial domination of Indochina and that they basically blackmailed the western powers into the conflict by threatening to join the soviet bloc if they didnt get to invade vietnam. Every military defeat of the USA was of course a victory for the NVA which shows just how good humans can be at war since they (NVA) were outgunned and had no air cover. Just like people said, Iraq and Afghanistan were another Vietnam because the political ambitions and goals were things that victory in a military conflict could not possibly bring.

Ernestas wrote:

Now look at Imperial Guard. They take their duty seriously. In most extreme cases like Death Korps of Krieg their society take their duty so seriously that they willingly sacrifice their humanity for Imperium's sake. Ours WW1's western front will be a joy for them for they will get a chance to bleed and torture their enemies in terrible war of attrition. Without a doubt I will say that their poorest soldiers will shame our elite.

Ernestas wrote:
They will follow orders to a letter. There is no supplies lost and no act of cowardice is ever committed. Human element is removed from their armies as much as it's in Death Korps of Krieg regiments.

Now this (above) is where I find your thinking to be very disturbing. You seem to admire and approve of the measures taken in WWI that devastated the western world and robbed a generation or more of its young men. You take it even farther by stating that an army that would commit the most vile war crimes possible would shame our own real world elite soldiers.

Ernestas wrote:

Without a doubt I will say that their poorest soldiers will shame our elite.

You clearly have a serious misunderstanding and dangerous fantasy about modern warfare, ethics and what it means to conduct war in an honorable manner. The fact of the matter is that the average soldier in western armies will shame the most elite member of the fictional army (Death Korps of Krieg) you admire because they will not torture prisoners, not kill noncombatants, not take war trophies and not wantonly destroy civilian property.

Honorable and ethically led armies, follow treaties about what weapons are permissable, how to treat noncombatants and how to treat prisoners of war. From what I can gather from your postings, you would abandon all of these ideas and admire the fictional 40k armies that have done so. One of my best friends formerly taught philosophy and ethics at West Point before he retired and one of his duties was to read the essay questions required of applicants about the conduct of war. I can absolutely guarantee that you would never be admitted to West Point.

Ernestas wrote:

They will follow orders to a letter.

Any professional soldier will follow orders to the letter. My experience is with USA armed forces (civilian employee of the Department of the Army) is that 99% or more of our soldiers are professional as I am sure is the case in many other armies. I am sure you will disapprove but there are many times a soldier is morally, legally and ethically obligated to disobey a direct order. In the USA a soldier swears to uphold the constitution. The constitution requires the USA to honor treaties which include laws about the conduct of war. A soldier cannot be excused for breaking these laws because he was ordered to do so.

Ernestas wrote:
I could go on and go on. Imperial guard is not just a mere PDF. They have a culture supporting it martial virtue while we have culture which denounces same thing.

You do not have the remotest idea or even the faintest glimmer of understanding what is meant by martial virtue. Your opinions have obviously not been shaped by an in depth study of the history of war or any human civilization. Your whole idea of martial virtue is apparently based on the perverted and demented armies of a science fiction universe that is so over the top in its violence that even 99% of its fans know it is all just for a good laugh and not to be taken seriously. A significant aspect of military virtue is the fact that modern soldiers do not engage in the kinds of behavior that you admire in the Death Korps of Krieg.

One of the things I admire about modern soldiers is the fact that the vast majority of soldiers follow the legal rules in the conduct of war which actually places them in greater jeopardy because it is a limitation on the methods that they can use. This is an example of honorable behavior and martial virtue.

Ernestas wrote:

They live in a constant warfare while we live in peace

Once again I request you to identify what planet you are posting from because it surely is not the Earth you could be referring to here. There has always been a war or multiple wars going on, you just dont know about them.

Ernestas wrote:

Maybe catachans whose genetic code is stretched to a limit.

You just made this up, there is nothing in the background to suggest this.

 LumenPraebeo wrote:

 Selym wrote:
Because this guy will have a gun and probably a feth hueg combat blade/chainsaw. Someone (probably the police) will try to disarm him. He won't drop the gun, so they'll be forced to use some "force" to make him drop his weapons.

You think police will try to disarm someone holding a chainsword and a futuristic blocky rifle with as imposing a figure as an Astartes? Lets assume I'm a smart person, the way I see it, I would try to establish a form of communication between him first. Do you disagree?

No.

If I'm a cop, and I see some 7'6" dude in a massive suit of armor... with a chainsword and massive gun... I'm shooting. And I'mma keep shooting until I'm dead or I run out of bullets.

 Traejun wrote:
No.

If I'm a cop, and I see some 7'6" dude in a massive suit of armor... with a chainsword and massive gun... I'm shooting. And I'mma keep shooting until I'm dead or I run out of bullets.

Why?

 LumenPraebeo wrote:

 Traejun wrote:
No.

If I'm a cop, and I see some 7'6" dude in a massive suit of armor... with a chainsword and massive gun... I'm shooting. And I'mma keep shooting until I'm dead or I run out of bullets.

Why?

'Cause Muhrica!

 Selym wrote:

 LumenPraebeo wrote:

 Traejun wrote:
No.

If I'm a cop, and I see some 7'6" dude in a massive suit of armor... with a chainsword and massive gun... I'm shooting. And I'mma keep shooting until I'm dead or I run out of bullets.

Why?

'Cause Muhrica!

Pretty much, yeah.

But, that said, it's more an indictment of the average human. Dumb... and armed. You see something like a space marine walking down the street, you're scared shitless. And, when you're scare shitless, the average person shoots first, asks questions later.

It's just that a SM looks so different from anything a modern human has seen. And that's when... wait for it... XENOphobia sets in.

First, a cop who sees a space marine is not going to shoot him. He's going to back away and call for support. Cops are dumbasses with a gun they are trained officers.

Second, modern soldiers are stronger, smarter, and far superior marksman than the WWI soldiers. They carry more weight, do more, and do it better.

JWhex, you are raising a lot of good points. I think that I could answer your reply and to continue this depate, but I will avoid continuing this off-topic and I will answer via pm to you little later. Now, I will explain my previous comment in a light which I always had in mind writing it.
I believe that it was my fault of not empathising more on that I'm speaking of primary traits of nations. I put them in a light of true militarism and Imperialism and compare them from that point of view. Also, I should have empathised more that my primary concern is not actions of our armies (which in my same example, vietnam, was at very least- decent), but support of home front. My primary concern is civilian support and their view on military which makes me to say that we would be unable to engage into anything serious due to their poor tolerance of hardships. By ''we" I mean american and european civilian population. ''We'' live in our own worlds far from any conflict and war, that's why I call us pacifists. Peace makes us soft and we will always be in trouble then we will be rudely awakened by something huge as WWs.


For now, I want to say that I was comparing inhumanity of Death Korps of Krieg not to praise them in most obvious sense, but to point out how w40k fictional armies are over the top and how we would scale poorly against most of that w40k can bring on the table.Meaning, if they and other Imperial guard regiments have problems in dealing with them, then most certainly ours military will be suffering form: 1. Total inexperience dealing with that w40k can offer 2. By being unable to bring proper response efficiently enough. It's my fault of not being more precise on that. It's same and with others regiments.
All of famous regiments have culture fitted for war and they sacrifice far more for it than we do. That's why I think that those fictional armies are superior to ours. Also, remember that I did mentioned that they go to inhuman depths for it and certainly, I cannot mean that it's a good thing. It's a necessary one, but certainly not that ours way of living or should be like theirs.
With catachans I do not want to begin other discussion, but I believe it's accepted as a fact that one of them is worth around ten of others solders. Due to that, they must have something working in their genes to make them so superior and knowing their home planet, it's just a logical conclusion that only ones with best genes will survive. (+They are not marked as ab-human)
I wrote poorly about Moridian Iron Guard, but you will certainly will agree that theirs discipline is far beyond anything that we have. I didn't meant that our soldiers are undisciplined, but I most certainly mean that we simply cannot achieve same level of inhuman discipline as they did.


Once again, by culture I didn't meant that I exclude all that you have said. That I meant, that we as civilians have little in common with war and are mentally and physically poorly prepared for it. Even more, our own culture followed by civilians emphasise things that are in opposition of militaristic culture.


Yes, I'm aware that those wars are very expensive. But, I will trust on your judgment here. Do you believe that a truly militaristic nation with culture fitting their tittle should have fared better in those conflicts?


In the end, I responded just to clarify my position which probably was poorly stated in a first place. I do not want to follow this discussion here and in time I will write you another reply via pm. If you think that I had explained myself enough that another reply is not necessary then say so. Also, if you think that our disagreements can be reduced to few points, then say so.

Ernestas wrote:

I believe that it was my fault of not empathising more on that I'm speaking of primary traits of nations. I put them in a light of true militarism and Imperialism and compare them from that point of view. Also, I should have empathised more that my primary concern is not actions of our armies (which in my same example, vietnam, was at very least- decent), but support of home front. My primary concern is civilian support and their view on military which makes me to say that we would be unable to engage into anything serious due to their poor tolerance of hardships. By ''we" I mean american and european civilian population. ''We'' live in our own worlds far from any conflict and war, that's why I call us pacifists. Peace makes us soft and we will always be in trouble then we will be rudely awakened by something huge as WWs.

I think I speak for Britain, Wales, Scotland and Ireland when I say "Bring it!".

 Shlazaor wrote:
First, a cop who sees a space marine is not going to shoot him. He's going to back away and call for support. Cops are dumbasses with a gun they are trained officers.

Second, modern soldiers are stronger, smarter, and far superior marksman than the WWI soldiers. They carry more weight, do more, and do it better.

No, no... you had it right the first time. Cops ARE dumbasses with guns.

 Traejun wrote:

 Shlazaor wrote:
First, a cop who sees a space marine is not going to shoot him. He's going to back away and call for support. Cops are dumbasses with a gun they are trained officers.

Second, modern soldiers are stronger, smarter, and far superior marksman than the WWI soldiers. They carry more weight, do more, and do it better.

No, no... you had it right the first time. Cops ARE dumbasses with guns.

Except in the UK, where they go in armed with nothing but a stick, a stab-proof vest, and the occasional pepper spray. They're badass mofos.

Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

You know, I think there are several members of this forum that are current/ex-military that would like a word with you.

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

The difference between modern soldiers and WW1 era ones is equipment and training. They're just "better" at what they do now... and are better equipped to complete their missions.

Ernestas wrote:
Do you believe that a truly militaristic nation with culture fitting their tittle should have fared better in those conflicts?

I will answer this one question then drop the discussion, pm me if you like.

No, I believe that the problem in those conflicts has NOT been strength of arms or military might. The problem is that the political goals and ambitions of the conflicts could not possibly be achieved by military action or by occupying a foreign land with an army. The military goals of the Afghan war were achieved rather quickly, deposing the Taliban and disrupting Al Quieda in Afghanistan. The long term political goal of rebuilding the Afghan nation is not possible with a military force. The military goal of deposing Saddam and destroying the Iraq army was also achieved very fast. Indeed NATO pretty much crushed his army in the First Gulf War. The long term political goal of making Iraq a democratic nation was stupid, impossible and of course never achieved.

Also, for your information since you live in Lithuania and brought up Vietnam, presently in the USA there is wide support and appreciation for the men and women in the armed services even among those who are opposed to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a very different situation than the open hostility vets received when returning from Vietnam.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Traejun wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

The difference between modern soldiers and WW1 era ones is equipment and training. They're just "better" at what they do now... and are better equipped to complete their missions.

Wow, Psienesis, that would be incredibly offensive if it wasnt so laughably wrong. Today's soldiers are very well trained, on average they are smarter and stronger. There is actual competition among soldiers for many of the specialized technical jobs and this competition definitely increases the quality of people holding those jobs. The level of education of modern soldiers is much higher than the level of young men and boys drafted to fight in WWI. This is no disrespect to the WWI soldiers, it was nearly a century ago when that war was fought and the USA was largely rural and educational opportunities were far fewer.

Traejun is absolutely correct

Hi everyone, first post to this forum, been a reader for months. Glad to be here.

As to the topic....

I would think if a SM appeared in the middle of time square, more than likely people would think its a gag and try to take pictures with him.

Depending upon the Chapter he would either try to slip away (I.E. Ultramarines) or start massacreing everything (Black templars).


There was a short story that came out a while ago about a detachment of dark angels during pre-heresy that made first contact with a world very similar to modern day earth. A squad of space marines killed thousands while loosing something like a dozen of there own, mainly to tank fire if I remember correctly.

I would compare space marine armour to our composite tank armours.

 Supertony51 wrote:
Hi everyone, first post to this forum, been a reader for months. Glad to be here.

As to the topic....

I would think if a SM appeared in the middle of time square, more than likely people would think its a gag and try to take pictures with him.

Depending upon the Chapter he would either try to slip away (I.E. Ultramarines) or start massacreing everything (Black templars).


There was a short story that came out a while ago about a detachment of dark angels during pre-heresy that made first contact with a world very similar to modern day earth. A squad of space marines killed thousands while loosing something like a dozen of there own, mainly to tank fire if I remember correctly.

I would compare space marine armour to our composite tank armours.

Welcome to Dakka

As for PA being like tank armour, I shall direct everyone to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_2

If space wolf traveled back in time he would do 2 things. 1.start burning pagans
2.start pillaging small villages

orkdestroyer1 wrote:
If space wolf traveled back in time he would do 2 things. 1.start burning pagans
2.start pillaging small villages

3) Enjoy the local women
4) Try the local beer, decide it's too weak
5) Show us how to make stronger beer.
6) Hold drinking contest.
7) One chug kills seven men, the SW drinks six barrels.

 infinite_array wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

You know, I think there are several members of this forum that are current/ex-military that would like a word with you.

They can come have their words with me. I'm a combat-experienced disabled Army vet myself. I'm pretty sure we can go round and point out the absolute hard-cases in every branch of the military, and probably also come to an agreement that Tankers are probably the dumbest SOBs to walk the Earth.

Wow, Psienesis, that would be incredibly offensive if it wasnt so laughably wrong. Today's soldiers are very well trained, on average they are smarter and stronger. There is actual competition among soldiers for many of the specialized technical jobs and this competition definitely increases the quality of people holding those jobs. The level of education of modern soldiers is much higher than the level of young men and boys drafted to fight in WWI. This is no disrespect to the WWI soldiers, it was nearly a century ago when that war was fought and the USA was largely rural and educational opportunities were far fewer.

The average age of a WW1 draftee was 25. The average age of the last round of draftees the US had, during the Vietnam War, was 19. In the early part of the 20th century, the age of 25 was well into your established adult years, already-established in a job, probably starting a family, dealing with "adult world" things, rather than being a fresh-out-of-college/party-life-living late teens/early 20s young person that we have now. Our society is fundamentally different now than it was then. We don't really expect people to start behaving "as adults" until they're approaching their 30s these days... but this is an entirely separate topic.

 Psienesis wrote:
*Snip*

I dispute your signature. Humans cost a heck of a lot. They've got to be fed.

Back on topic, if I saw a SM IRL, I think the first thing to set in would be xenophobia, the human body's natural response to unknown living entities.
That could cause some unnecessary shooting.

 Psienesis wrote:

 infinite_array wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

You know, I think there are several members of this forum that are current/ex-military that would like a word with you.

They can come have their words with me. I'm a combat-experienced disabled Army vet myself. I'm pretty sure we can go round and point out the absolute hard-cases in every branch of the military, and probably also come to an agreement that Tankers are probably the dumbest SOBs to walk the Earth.

hey... look here asshat... my dad was a tank driver. Mind you, not in the U.S., but a tanker nonetheless. So, yeah... sod off.

 Selym wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
*Snip*

I dispute your signature. Humans cost a heck of a lot. They've got to be fed.

Food's still cheaper than gas or electricity... especially if you can feed people the rendered-down remains of the dead. Mmm... corpse-starch rations!

 Psienesis wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
*Snip*

I dispute your signature. Humans cost a heck of a lot. They've got to be fed.

Food's still cheaper than gas or electricity... especially if you can feed people the rendered-down remains of the dead. Mmm... corpse-starch rations!

..when suddenly the Matrix!

Nah, it's a reference to "CS Rations" that they feed the Imperial Guard. You think Hive Worlds bury their dead? They got no room for that! They just render them down into "corpse starch" and press them into a bar-like shape, wrap it in plastic, and send it out.

 Psienesis wrote:

 infinite_array wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Modern soldiers are no stronger, and no smarter, than their WW1 counterparts. In fact, they might be quite a bit dumber. Our modern soldiers are, after all, part of the 4Chan generation.

You know, I think there are several members of this forum that are current/ex-military that would like a word with you.

They can come have their words with me. I'm a combat-experienced disabled Army vet myself. I'm pretty sure we can go round and point out the absolute hard-cases in every branch of the military, and probably also come to an agreement that Tankers are probably the dumbest SOBs to walk the Earth.

Wow, Psienesis, that would be incredibly offensive if it wasnt so laughably wrong. Today's soldiers are very well trained, on average they are smarter and stronger. There is actual competition among soldiers for many of the specialized technical jobs and this competition definitely increases the quality of people holding those jobs. The level of education of modern soldiers is much higher than the level of young men and boys drafted to fight in WWI. This is no disrespect to the WWI soldiers, it was nearly a century ago when that war was fought and the USA was largely rural and educational opportunities were far fewer.

The average age of a WW1 draftee was 25. The average age of the last round of draftees the US had, during the Vietnam War, was 19. In the early part of the 20th century, the age of 25 was well into your established adult years, already-established in a job, probably starting a family, dealing with "adult world" things, rather than being a fresh-out-of-college/party-life-living late teens/early 20s young person that we have now. Our society is fundamentally different now than it was then. We don't really expect people to start behaving "as adults" until they're approaching their 30s these days... but this is an entirely separate topic.

The fact that the average age was 25 does not support your statement that modern soldiers are dumber than WWI soldiers. First of all we have to establish what you mean by dumber, do you mean they were less intelligent or do you mean they were less well educated?

The measurement of intelligence is controversial and there is a huge literature base critical of how and even if the any measurement is valid. In any case, intelligence, if it exists would not be something that would change in a human population in a mere century, probably not in a hundred centuries. It could definitely be affected by factors like nutrition and there is no doubt that the draft in WWI was biased toward poor whites and blacks and that wealthier whites and whites in the industrialized North were better able to avoid the draft.

Indeed there was a lot of resistance to the draft especially in the South, one may speculate that perhaps the smarter people found a way to avoid being drafted. If any cause for a difference in intelligence between WW1 and present day American soldiers was to be pursued it would probably be an investigation of nutritional differences and rate of childhood diseases. The early nineteenth century population in the South had terrible outbreaks of hookworms for example, which causes massive blood loss and malnutrition.

Even though average age was higher (so you claim with no reference) the skewed demographic of who was inducted by class, race, geography and wealth strongly suggests that the draftee population would have been poorly educated compared to today. There were very few, and by that I mean a tiny number, of post secondary educational opportunities for blacks in the early 20th century and of course the elementary through high school education was segregated and terribly funded. Likewise, in the rural South the educational level would have been lower for poor whites due to social and economic factors of a labor intensive farming economy and rural population demographic.

Average age does not mean anything at all unless you have other population measures to see how it might be skewed. The first draft was 21-31 and then it was changed from 18-45. Now what this means is that you would have to test for skewness with a random permutation test to determine if average really was a measure of central tendency. You can get an idea visually by looking at a series of graphs, each year, y axis= total, x axis = age of draftee. Now a pattern of skewness can indeed be seen visually if the case is extreme but you need a random permutation test to be sure no skewness is present. I searched online for awhile but did not locate any source of the raw data needed.

Now what all this boils down to is, you dont know WTF you are talking about. I dont think you would even know where to start in making this historical comparison because if you knew enough about American history and statistics you would have not made such a foolish statement to begin with.

One more thing, are you a tanker?

No, I was Commo, though I spent most of my time hanging out with 1/33 Armor Division on Fort Lewis, while I was stationed there.

As for all your bits about statistics... try Google. My results for "Average Age of Vietnam War Draftee" brings me to:
http://www.vvof.org/factsvnv.htm and
http://www.nationalvietnamveteransfoundation.org/statistics.htm

... which doesn't provide the exact numbers I was looking for, but it provides enough interesting information to indicate that Google, or another search engine, is a valuable tool for forum-research.

I am noting, though, that the average age numbers appear to be centering around casualties, rather than draftees. However, most groups tracking these statistics are basing them on the soldiers listed as KIA, rather than draft reports or Selective Service records... so it may be an issue of different numbers from different sources ending up with different results.

It may also be that records from this time simply aren't available, since a lot of these sites are spitting out the same number from the same sources.


As far as rating intelligence? One needs only visit an internet forum, or read the newspaper, to see that plainly. Are all kids stupid these days? No. Are a lot of them stupid? Oh, hell yes. This, though, holds true across the entire population.

 Psienesis wrote:
No, I was Commo, though I spent most of my time hanging out with 1/33 Armor Division on Fort Lewis, while I was stationed there.

As far as rating intelligence? One needs only visit an internet forum, or read the newspaper, to see that plainly. Are all kids stupid these days? No. Are a lot of them stupid? Oh, hell yes. This, though, holds true across the entire population.

You seem to have a grudge against "kids these days". Like you, my father was in army communications, but he was not an officer. He was drafted in 58 and he was certainly of the opinion that he was not surrounded by a lot of smart people then and there.

For example, he was assigned to operate a radio in a truck and a lot of soldiers told him that they were glad he had that job and not them because "when the fighting starts you are going to be in a lot of trouble." My dad is a bit of a kidder and smart alec and he would tell the grunts "Why no, this is the safest place on the battle field because this truck makes a big magnetic field that will deflect all the bullets and shells." Amazingly, this assertion went unchallenged to the repeated delight of my father.

Somehow I think "kids these days" would not fall for the kind of BS my dad was handing out in the late fifties.

Well, if you weren't surrounded by idiots at any point of your life then you either are lucky or blind (No offense intended). I'm learning one of the best universes in my country and yet, larger part of students are objectively idiots. Situation are even worse in more poorly rated institutions or in less prestigious places. Sadly, I see this trend everywhere in a western world.

While that might not work today(magnetic cars), but we have enough examples of pseudo-science and fears out of ignorance today to counter your example.