7 ms·

What is the point of such a crazy schedule? If someone has to do a double-graveyard shift and is basically useless the rest of the week, why not just split that

• bayindirh 6y ago
  I'm not military, but worked with them for two years, sometimes with similar schedules. My view about being a soldier, a serviceman has changed drastically during that projects. The cause is noble, and the thing they're doing is very hard. Make no mistake here. On the other hand, they're stripped of their emotions and humanity to an extent. They become something else, an hardened being after some time. Because, they need to do what has to be done and they shouldn't think through it, but just act. I'm a grandson of a commander. I love soldiers, but this is how they're trained, and this is how they should be to be able to perform this duty.
  • watwut 6y ago
    Imo, whether being soldier is noble depends very very much on which army you are in and what are current goals and conduct of said army.
    • zdkl 6y ago
      One could argue the qualities of a soldier or officer (individuals) transcend their organisational context (groups) and time. In other words: politics, technology or best practices change, not the responsabilities. The ability (necessity, even) to adapt to that fact defines a fit-for-service soldier/officer. So, I contend you find remarkable soldiers even in terrible groups, and that they (individuals) should not be judged on their group but on their own qualities of service. Whether you find those parameters noble is entirely subjective and not mine to question but I do believe anyone who sincerely understands and accepts these obligations deserves respect, as an individual.
      • bayindirh 6y ago
        Thanks for clarifying. This is exactly what I was trying to compose in my mind as an answer, but unable to do so.
      • watwut 6y ago
        > So, I contend you find remarkable soldiers even in terrible groups, and that they (individuals) should not be judged on their group but on their own qualities of service. So, we should praise ISIS fighters? I am intentionally picking up example of extreme, but very real organization. Same question can be asked about SS members. They knew what they joined. Does them doing good job in that organization is really praise worthy? The better quality their service was, the more victims they have.
        • bayindirh 6y ago
          > So, we should praise ISIS fighters? You're distorting it. I was trying to point out that, they have to deform themselves to somewhat non-human states. It's not valid only for servicemen. Firefighters are same. Police are same. Long haul truckers, cargo ship crew are same. I think everybody making sacrifices for doing what they find worthy are eligible for some respect. They accept to deform themselves to do something they find value in. Do not add ethnicity, politics, geography, race into this. It's about being human, and other parts are neither part of my comment nor has place in this specific thread.
          • watwut 6y ago
            I am not distorting. I am using unambiguous example of what I have in mind. > soldiers even in terrible groups, and that they (individuals) should not be judged on their group but on their own qualities of service. Unless you was forced into that group, which was not case of SS but in some cases could be ISIS, you know what you were joining. I don't think sacrifice itself is worth respect, if the goal of that sacrifice is destructive and wrong. If you sacrifice yourself in service of group that does genocide or tortures to get power and so on, you did genocide and tortured people so that your group have power. The ideology of "sacrifice is worth respect no matter what" empowers exactly these groups first. Believing this makes people more likely to join these. The victims, especially those who stood against that group should be celebrated. Those who said "no" deserve respect. Those who were avoiding still deserve more respect.
    • closeparen 6y ago
      A society gets no points for having noble goals if it lacks the capacity to attain them.
  • mbrodersen 6y ago
    Being a soldier is in itself not honourable or noble. Most atrocities are committed by armed soldiers killing unarmed civilians (or killing civilians using drones because they happen to stand near a wanted target). It is what you do as a soldier (or civilian) that makes you honourable or not.
• redisman 6y ago
  It's part of the military training. Find your physical and mental limits and then break them.
• smcl 6y ago
  The author is in the military - I've read a fair few things by current and former service members and two of the most common themes are: - the disregard for health and wellbeing of each soldier - being required to do nonsensical things that are counterproductive and likely compromise medium-to-long term goals of the outfit you're attached to So I agree with what you said - there is very likely a way to schedule these shifts so that these problems do not occur. The Army has little interest in this though, their requirement is that the shifts need to be covered and they currently are so there is no problem. edit: updated comment to be country agnostic
  • postpawl 6y ago
    The author says he’s in the ROK (republic of Korea) army: https://tyler.kim/army-review https://tyler.kim/army-review
    • smcl 6y ago
      OH I should amend my post then! I suspect that this sort of stuff is international anyway
  • pram 6y ago
    One particular experience that stands out when I was in the Air Force was some Sergeant changing our physical training time from after work to 5:30AM. As in everyone commutes to the base and is in formation at that time. It was just sadistic torture essentially lol
    • cosmodisk 6y ago
      This is a good example of why I didn't want to join the army. I understand the importance of instilling order and readiness,but it can be done in many ways, not necessarily with 'just because I can'. I've heard countless examples like this, the worst being where some poor guys had to carry a cigarette butt on stretches for a few miles, then dig a massive pit and bury it.
  • andrewem 6y ago
• choeger 6y ago
  Military organizations tend to detach personal for long shifts so the remaining unit can stay somewhat functional in their normal schedule. When I was on guard duty it was usually a 24h shift followed by a 24h break for a group of 8 or 10 privates and 2 NCOs. That means that roughly a quarter of the company is permanently detached. If you switch to 12hour shifts, you have to consider that normal operations take place during daytime. At any day you then have three groups unavailable: One on duty, one resting from the night shift, and one preparing for the night shift.
• Clewza313 6y ago
  Welcome to Hell Korea. The country is infamous for poor working conditions, particularly in the military, where the author was apparently serving out their mandatory military service. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_Joseon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_Joseon http://www.koreatimesus.com/hazing-deaths-in-korea-disturbingly-unsurprising/ http://www.koreatimesus.com/hazing-deaths-in-korea-disturbin...
• solatic 6y ago
  It's like that quote about how the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent - the organization can stay dysfunctional longer than you can stay sane. For any truly big system, inertia is a more powerful force than you think. The isn't a strategic or tactical purpose that makes this kind of situation an intentional or desired outcome. Any sufficiently large organization, and this especially holds true by militaries, are typified by the following two characteristics. First, turnover at scale necessarily prevents the rank-and-file, in aggregate, from learning and developing over time. Every year, X number of people will leave the organization for reasons the organization can't control (retirement, spouses moving, legal mandates, whatever) and they will be replaced by people who are completely unfamiliar with the organization and any lessons the people leaving may have learned. Not replacing the people leaving will leave positions unfilled, which is untenable, so they will be filled by whoever is around to fill the chair. This is inevitable and unavoidable. Second, there are only so many issues that upper management can focus on. By the time people rise up through the ranks and get into a position where they have the power to do anything, the vast majority of what it means to exercise that power is to act like a hospital at a mass casualty event - triage for the most critical issues that need your attention and trust that a solid reliance on process will prevent anything else from collapsing. If you're looking for logic then you don't understand how these organizations work.
  • goatinaboat 6y ago
    If you're looking for logic then you don't understand how these organizations work The logic is that everyone must be replaceable on a moments notice because they might be shot and someone else will need to pick up that job. Having roles that you need to be intimately familiar with in order to be effective is the exact opposite of what the military needs. If a job can be done by someone with minimal training while desperately sleep-deprived then that is perfect for their needs.
    • solatic 6y ago
      That's an ideal, not the reality. The reality is actually pretty frequently similar to the private sector - someone is the only person who knows how to do something, they leave, and they're replaced by someone who doesn't know how to do it and picks things up as they go along. It's one of the reasons why militaries can feel pretty dysfunctional. The only way of ensuring that people are adequately replaceable is to have formal training programs, and the only way of ensuring that those training programs improve over time is to have a feedback loop to take in lessons from the field and to keep abreast of updates to the state-of-the-art. Ultimately this is too costly, even for militaries, with possible rare exceptions in small special-ops type units where people do rotate between operations and training and rarely de-facto leave the unit and as such, do not suffer from the same manpower pressures of most military units while enjoying attention of upper management when desired.