Alan (very thoughtfully, I thought) said: What keeps soldiers at the sharp end
from making themselves scarce when the whizzbangs start to fly? Firstly,
there's the fear of letting down your mates. But also, there's tradition: our
ancestors (even if they weren't blood relations) managed to do (insert heroic
deed here) so we have the capability to do the same. So we *can* overcome our
fear. And not merely that, but tear those enemy bastards limb from limb and
rip their throats out with our teeth if neccessary.
[Tomb] You develop, I believe, a very low opinion of the value of the
other guys life when you realize he's willing to kill you. You become much
more ready to kill him first at that point. This is part of the
demonization/objectification training that most military institutions
use, but it is also human nature. If you've gotta have fight or flight
hormones raging, from a win or die situation perspective, you want the fight
hormones going for your unit members.
So it doesn't matter that those who fought at Anzac Cove are long gone, nor
that not a drop of their blood flows in our veins. They did it: we can too.
To everyone upon this earth Death cometh soon or late But how can we die
better Than facing fearless odds For the ashes of our fathers And the temples
of our gods?
[Tomb] The choice is yours soldier,
When the grey day draws nigh, Bright day to live, Grey day to die.
Finally, there's another very important thing: the reputation of units.
Australian infantry has the (deserved) reputation of being indomitable shock
troops. Their reputation scares the bejayzus out of the opposition. And that's
a huge advantage. Success breeds success, and failure breeds failure. That's
why Regimental traditions are so
important - and conversely, if you're up against an opponent with such
traditions, you're going to have to fight twice, thrice or more times as hard,
as they won't quit.
[Tomb] Espirit de Corps comes from the belief that your comrades will
bust their asses not to let you down, so you have to bust yours for them.
You've been through hell together and your instructors have broken you down as
an individual and built you up as a team. You learn you lose as one individual
but win as a team and there is nothing you can't do as part of that team. And
part of that is inculcation in the great deeds (we tend to ignore the mediocre
periods and actively forget the bad days) your antecedents did. Yes, you don't
have any blood connection, but you both wore the same uniform. In some way,
coming up short would be failing them. Most of the time, you'd rather die (or
risk dying) than do so. Strong tradition coupled with indoctrination breeds a
strong will to win (and also a strong confidence that you can). Success does
indeed beget success, and some legends are built on. I'm quite sure Gurkhas
aren't quite as fierce as the legends indicate (while still waaaay fierce),
but they're canny little guys who understand the advantage of their fearsome
rep (and they have black humor) so they play it up. This
makes them _more_ effective, not less. If the enemy is willing to
crumble at the mention of your name, then it makes life safer. OTOH, it means
that sometimes you have to live up to your rep and pay the piper. But by then,
you've got the weight of tradition, precendent, ancestors (in a military
sense), and institutional memory all riding in your rucksack.
> Tomb wrote:
> Alan (very thoughtfully, I thought) said:
Soldiers fight because that is what their training tells them to do. They will
continue to fight until the results of applying their training apparently
fail. If they cannot run away and are not given time to think, they will keep
applying their training until they are dead. Esprit de corps
and regimental history (plus a good dose of in-your-face noncoms) get
them to the fight and blind panic will keep them there, but only so long as
they do not realise that following orders is not likely to keep them alive.
With adrenalin, everything that you do well, you can do even better, but
anything that you are not good at becomes almost impossible. The high stress
causes you to viciously prune your decision tree, so that you respond
--- Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
> Soldiers fight because that is what their training
As a side note, has anyone he read Men Against Fire? The point is made very
cogently that men fight because of the team effect.
> If they cannot run away and are not given time to
Maybe it's just because I do more than load and fire in a mechanistic
sequence, but I do think in the simulated firefights I've been in. Of course,
everyone since the Civil War has been doing more than loading and firing
mechanically. The question is, "What are you thinking about." Thinking
"Where's something I can hide behind while I shoot this guy" is good. Thinking
"What's the fastest way out of here?" is bad.
> Esprit de corps and regimental history (plus a good
Eh? What universe is this in? Following good orders is the ONLY thing that
keeps you alive in a firefight.
Units that fall apart get wiped out--casualties are
always highest in the pursuit of a broken enemy.
> > Esprit de corps and regimental history (plus a good
Blind panic does *not* make for effective soldiers.
> > but only so long as they do not realise that following orders is
Following orders keeps you alive....as long as the rest of your units are also
following their orders. What gets you killed is when you follow orders and
your flankers don't. Or when you don't, but you bugged out a little late. Or a
little early. Or in the wrong direction. Or too slowly, etc.
One reason the Israelis constantly whip the Arabs is the Israelis have the
teamwork down pat ("I'll die to protect my buddies") and the Arabs have an
"every man for himself" attitude. The Israelis are willing to die, so they
don't; the Arabs aren't, so they do.
> On 5-Dec-01 at 22:06, John Atkinson (johnmatkinson@yahoo.com) wrote:
> Maybe it's just because I do more than load and fire
Not that I've ever been in even simulated ground combat (Ex-Navy)
but I always thought ground trianing was much like martial arts training. The
training teaches you to react and to not panic, freeing your brain up to
think. Those who "win" at higher levels are those who think well in addition
to reacting well.
> Laserlight wrote:
> > > Esprit de corps and regimental history (plus a good
I have poorly used "panic". Most people will say that they panicked in
situations where they didn't really. Maybe I should have used "terror",
"fear", or some other expression. High stress removes from the decision
process any option that requires an action that is not already a habit.
British soldiers were trained to form up in lines and drilled until (in the
Napoleanic wars) they could fire a withering three volleys a minute. They
never broke, they stood there and died, firing three rounds a minute. Panic,
as generally used, only happens when nothing that you do well applies to the
situation, leaving you with the wetware equivalent of a nil dereferencing
error.
My personal experience along those lines occurred, while crossing the street,
when a driver decided to turn right, at the point when I was even with his
hood ornament (he was looking left for coming traffic). Faced with no rational
options, I attacked the vehicle with my fists (it made sense at the time). To
my pleasant surprise, it actually worked. A more tragic example was a licensed
skydiving instructor with several hundred (thousand?) jumps who fell to his
death when he thought that jumping with
an off-handed harness was no big deal; even though, he had never done it
before.
On the other hand, if you have rational options, panic inducing situations
drastically improve your performance. An Air Canada pilot that was flying a
wide bodied jet, only to have it become a very bad glider (due to loading
insufficient fuel), managed to bring it down on an abandoned airstrip. No
other pilot has managed to duplicate this feat in the simulator [Because it
was the pilot's own fault that the plane had insufficient fuel, Air Canada
wrote absolutely stunning references before firing him]. I think it was in
Sioux City that an aircraft actually made
> On the other hand, if you have rational options, panic inducing
There was an Eagle lost its wing--the entire left wing, you
understand, not just the tip--and made it back. McDonnell Douglas
assured them it was impossible.
--- Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
> I have poorly used "panic". Most people will say
Again, a soldier that allows terror or fear to control him is a bad soldier
and ineffective on the battlefield.
> removes from the decision
Nonsense--improvisation under fire is a highly honored
tradition in the US Army. We plan for contingencies, and invariably find that
the contingency that occours is not one on the list. Yet somehow it keeps
working.
> British soldiers were trained to form up in lines
Right. Like I said, cadaver-like obedience (I forget
the German term) is useful if you want men to stand in line and fire three
shots a minute. I want my troops to fire and maneuver like humans, not stand
still like corpses.
> On 7-Dec-01 at 15:34, John Atkinson (johnmatkinson@yahoo.com) wrote:
Training is to take care of all the little things. You don't want to think
about how to take the safety off, you don't want to invent handsignals on the
spot. When you have all the little things to the point you don't need to think
of them you can then think about "What can I do to give me my best chances of
succeeding and surviving?"
I have always been bothered by the concept that a little fear and adrenalin
makes you into a machine.
> adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca wrote:
> I think it was in Sioux City that an aircraft actually made
[snip]
> Just the thought of that pilot's presence of mind is boggling...
It helped that one of the passengers was the instructor pilot who had written
the airline's pilot manual for the type. He concentrated on the throttles
while the pilots told him what they wanted the plane to do (along with what
the plane was doing). It was a coordinated effort.
The irony is that all three were absolutely despondant that not everyone got
out of the plane. The rescue crews required a bit of time to figure out how
the gawkers had beaten them to the crash, as they were surprised that anyone