35 ms·

Why I'm in the Army Reserve – an explainer for my friends in tech

• dogman144 5y ago
  The DoD could certainly use some technical help, and the leadership from ex (or current reserve/national guard aka "R/NG") officers and NCOs in tech jobs benefits the tech industry. The issue is this - the American military Reserve/NG is not very truthful, in my experience, with the time commitments. The marketing slogan is "a weekend a month, two weeks a summer" of time commitment, or something to that effect. In reality, as a National Guard member you'll see commonly see month-long "activations" to go supplement active duty military training in Louisiana in February. You'll see 9 month deployments as R/NG are in fact part of the military and will deploy, and you'll go over there with a fraction of the training, funding and equipment but the same mission requirements as the funded, trained, and equipped active duty unit you replaced. This is somewhat akin to a FAANG hiring a suite of contractors and subbing them in to take over Google Search for a quarter or two. When your R/NG Soldier has domestic issues, you as the R/NG are on the hook to go help them quite literally. The list goes on... All for pretty bad pay, so-so healthcare, and a civilian employer who starts having an aneurism about the lack of managed expectations from you as it's not a weekend a month and some summer vacation time. To bring this back to tech - the situation above is very well known, and it coincides with the military's efforts to heavily ramp up its technical expertise via "software factories," civilian corps, direct-commissions into elevated ranks at higher pay if you're a technical SME like the military does with civilian doctors, and reserve units focusing on cyber or software development. Unless the military is able to fix that above, which anyone who has spent a shred of time in active duty military can confirm exists in one form or the other, the upside-down logic of R/NG service will keep good technical hires out... unless they really need the healthcare. The talented ex-military who go into tech stay out of R/NG efforts because of this, as serving actively would damage their career. I hope it is different in the UK! Edit - I will put a hopeful ending to this: the PLA's (CN mil) hackers go to "work" in an officer tower in a city, wearing civilian clothes, and (at the risk of speculation I don't enough about probably) work a 9-5 or if they're up late, it's for a mission. I say this with some background in the US version of ex-mil in tech: the moment the DoD and Federal agencies enable its technical hires to go to work in NY, Seattle, or SF in a fiber-equipped office building (or really just not rural West Virginia/North Carolina/Alabama/Mass), can meet at least 60% of private sector pay with some tax benefits perhaps, and gets sane about past civilian marijuana use re: getting a security clearance, they will have more technical patriots signing up than they can handle processing. It's really just this simple. The FBI was trying to hire talented CS students out of college with a great opportunity to go work in their brand new facility for tech that they built in.... Huntsville, Alabama.
  • akamia 5y ago
    This is spot on. I had a coworker who was in the reserves and the commitment was significantly more than what they say in the brochures. He was often gone for weeks at a time. This made it really difficult for him to progress because he was never able to start AND finish any major projects. Our manager really tried to support him but going through a promo process without any good examples of execution is nearly impossible. Even raises and bonuses were tough because our company's policy in these circumstances was to default their rating to "meets expectations". The company didn't want to penalize people for their service but it also meant he usually didn't get anything above the average rating. Middle of the road salary adjustments and bonuses. Not bad but not great.
    • dogman144 5y ago
      Ya, it's a real organizational management and national service tragedy. So much of the technical modernization is getting pushed towards the R/NG units, and you can just see how that will go short/mid term. This is paired with a common refrain from vets in tech that the pay and lifestyle is great but the work is pretty empty, so they'd look to do something else. But, they also know the meaningless silliness they'd sign up for by going back into the R/NG, let alone active duty. So, they land in defense contractors or SV startups doing defense tech, and straddle a middle ground that's not much better. The good ones won't go to the big defense contractors either. Therefore, given that the recruitment target is a populace that has lived fairly simple lives in duty stations around the US, are happy earning something over $100k and calling it a day, and have pretty firm moral views on the importance and value of service the inability to capture this population back into public service due to the lack of any form of sane incentives is maddening to watch. Even discussing the pay is hard - the general populace and their representatives in congress (I say this reading OPEDs via them, although it is def anecdotal) can't believe that $70k is too low pay for an engineer to leave private sector. I'll stop this rant here, but my dream is someone in power finally starts understanding it's only (1) pay, (2) work geography matching modern tech centers, (3) drug policies from the 1950's keeping the talent out in aggregate.
  • Upgrayyed_U 5y ago
    Thank you for posting this. I'm a USAF vet and former reservist and guardsmen. Most of the rest of the comments here are FUD, but this one actually captures one of the biggest challenges of balancing military service with a developing career. Here's the actual reality on the ground, from someone who's been in and around the military for ~ 20 years: - A surprisingly high percentage of military personnel share views that would fit right in with the HN crowd. They are largely anti-war and anti-interventionists but continue to serve for a variety of other reasons. What you see on TV and TikTok is often a gross mischaracterization of who military people are and what they think. - The military is an amazing escalator for the poor and lower middle-class. I know plenty of folks who started out as junior airmen making less than $25k a year in their early 20s who are solidly upper-middle class/rich millionaires in their 40s. Sure tech affords you the same opportunities these days, but that wasn't necessarily the case when the folks were getting started 20 years ago. - As a rule, you generally have a lot of freedom when deciding which assignments to take as a reservist or guardsman, at least on the Air Force side. There are usually more volunteers for missions than their are slots available for people to go into. From my understanding, this is much less true on the Army side, where they will often deploy an entire unit on a mission. Anyone assigned to the unit most go, with few exceptions. - The benefits are generally better than what the HN crowd are representing here. It's pretty easy to get a 4-year degree from a good (and occasionally great) school with little or no out-of-pocket expenses. You can also buy a house up to $650,000 in most areas (with adjustments for even higher cost-of-living areas) with $0 down and no PMI payment. You've captured most of the downsides here. But for me, the biggest downside was that the military (at least during the time I served) has an extremely poor record of properly recognizing talent within its ranks. I worked with a lot of folks who could and often did land cushy jobs in SV. But back in their military jobs, they often were tasked with menial jobs that failed to take advantage of their talents. Yes, there are leaders that can and do recognize talent in their ranks. And the Air Force isn't nearly as hierarchical and directive as folks here would have you think. But rank still matters. I left when the delta between my "rank" in my civilian career and my military rank became to big to bear.
• jleyank 5y ago
  A fair number of people in the US, probably in other countries with similar programs, use the military as a means of funding their education at the uni or post-uni level. The govt pays for them, and in return there is a multi-year commitment in some form of the military. It's a good deal for both sides, although the risks were pointed out big-time back when Desert Shield became Desert Storm and a whole lot of EMT...MD's disappeared from neighbourhoods and reappeared in the Middle East. Something about the King's Shilling.
  • chrisseaton 5y ago
    In the UK you typically go to college (university in our terminology) before you join the Army, rather than after, but we do have bursaries to support some technical specialities if they commit to joining after they graduate. You can also do in-service degrees, up to PhD I believe.
    • zip1234 5y ago
      In the US, all officers must be university grads. The enlisted ranks do not need a university degree to join. I would assume the same is true of enlisted ranks in the UK.
      • digikazi 5y ago
        Technically you don't need a degree to be an officer in the UK: you only need A Levels (finish high school) to go to Sandhurst and begin officer training. In reality however something like 98% of Sandhurst applicants are university graduates. I don't know the exact percentage of entrants who don't have a degree though, so don't quote me. It has been a while. P.s. as a famous example, I believe Prince Harry went to Sandhurst without going to university first.
  • namelessoracle 5y ago
    The American military is a social welfare program in many parts yes.
• h2odragon 5y ago
  > we emphasise explaining the context two levels up. I may tell my soldiers to raid a compound, but I would also tell them that the reason for this is to create a distraction so that the Colonel can divert the enemy away from a bridge, and that the reason the Brigadier wants the Colonel to divert the enemy is so that the bridge is easier to cross. many organizations could benefit from more of that.
  • salawat 5y ago
    That's how I do things with my group. How do you expect people to learn to see the bigger picture if you never admit or make them aware there is one in the first place?
  • matwood 5y ago
    The term is communicating the "Commanders Intent". It's exactly I how work with my teams. Giving the people doing the work as much information as possible, lets them make better decisions as all the little decisions pop up. I wasn't in the military, and have always led this way because it seemed more effective and tbh, less work for me. Ideally I don't need to micro-manage anyone when they have all the same information that I do. If a big issue comes up, I trust my team to surface it me. I've watched other managers deal in information (only sharing bits and pieces to certain people), and it just never made sense to me IMO. Everyone was always a little confused and things were never done quite right.
    • belfalas 5y ago
      > The term is communicating the "Commanders Intent". There is a classic presentation from Mary Poppendieck on this, highly recommend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypEMdjslEOI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypEMdjslEOI
      • matwood 5y ago
        Great talk! Thank you.
• ZanyProgrammer 5y ago
  > I spend about a hundred days a year of my spare-time in evenings, weekends, and holidays, training my Squadron. From an American perspective, as someone who was in our Army Reserve, that's an insane amount of time if you aren't a full time AGR. I guess he like's his big time Major pay and status, but if you're really dedicated to being a part time soldier, the higher you rise in rank the more you'll be expected to contribute in your own personal time.
  • HL33tibCe7 5y ago
    > I guess he like's his big time Major pay I doubt pay is a factor for the author at all. A quick look (https://apply.army.mod.uk/what-we-offer/army-reserve/army-reserve-benefit https://apply.army.mod.uk/what-we-offer/army-reserve/army-re...) reveals Majors in the reserves make £135/day, which is frankly nothing compared to what the author would earn in his job at Shopify.
    • ZanyProgrammer 5y ago
      Well presumably he gets paid at the normal active duty rate when he’s called up, or whatever the UK equivalent is.
      • HL33tibCe7 5y ago
        http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.php#.YksfMKTTXDs http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.php#.YksfMKTTXDs the salary for an actively-serving Major ranges from roughly £55k-£65k pa. The author is probably earning at least twice that at Shopify, if not considerably more.
      • exdsq 5y ago
        When you join the reserves you have to go through basic infantry training (you can't just go straight to Sandhurst like if you went into the regulars). You're paid £40.13 per day at the moment (I think I was paid something like £30 a day when I went through it a decade ago). I don't think anyone goes in for the money - I've made a days training sat on the toilet after lunch at my last contract gig.
• fy70 5y ago
  [flagged]
• advisedwang 5y ago
  The author glosses over my biggest question "Who might you have to fight?" with a informative "Queen’s enemies." Might his squadron be called in to quash civil disturbance? Sent to the next Iraq? Is it reserved for defending the UK from invasion?
  • watwut 5y ago
    Afaik, soldiers don't get to choose. The queens enemies is pretty much good description, because his guess is as good as yours.
    • giraffe_lady 5y ago
      I don't think they were literally looking for an answer for this specific question, but pointing out how unsettling, at the very least, the lack of concrete answers is. Anyway if they won't say it I will: signing up to fight without knowing who or why you'll be fighting is morally compromised at the extreme very best. Modern economic powers like the UK do not use their militaries for self-defense. Someone able to write with his sophistication about the military knows what they use them for. In serving, and even in writing this piece of pro-military propaganda, he's supporting imperial violence.
      • daedalus_f 5y ago
        > Modern economic powers like the UK do not use their militaries for self-defense. Modern economic powers have militaries and alliances that make attacking them unattractive. They have sufficient teeth to dissuade conflict. If you are fortunate enough to live in a Western democracy your safety and security is preserved by the actions of those who you call morally compromised.
        • giraffe_lady 5y ago
          Doesn't really matter for this purpose, I'm not arguing that the military is inherently wrong, or that military service is. I'm asserting that by far the most likely use of a wealthy nation's military is going to be a bad one. Encouraging people to join the military in that context is bad. People have an incredibly wide range of reasons for joining or supporting militaries, and I would absolutely not universally condemn all of them. Just this one. --- That aside, just because I benefit from something doesn't make it ok. What kind of first grader ethics is that?
• sputknick 5y ago
  I spent five years in the Air Force. Posts like this are really helpful, a lot of Americans are disconnected from members of the military, especially in the upper classes where people do not need to serve, or in fields (like tech) where people can often find less intrusive ways to pay for college. My favorite part of the article is dispelling the myth that in the military senior people bark orders, and don't ask for feedback, and subordinates dutifully carry out those orders. None of those is true. There is a time to "shut up and color" but that is by far the exception. For the young people on here, I can't tell you what to do, but I can tell you serving in the military was a positive experience for me.
  • umvi 5y ago
    Some reserve units in the US are highly technical too. I did a cyber education course at AFIT when I was in Air Force ROTC and there was a particular reserve unit somewhere in Maryland I want to say nearish NSA that had a lot of super smart security researchers that came to guest lecture us including Raphael Smudge (creator of https://github.com/rsmudge/armitage https://github.com/rsmudge/armitage)
    • tomcam 5y ago
      I refuse to look up the name Raphael Smudge. I choose to believe it is the name of a villain in the third Sonic movie.
    • theturingnerd 5y ago
      Mudge is great. Super smart guy. He, too, left, rather tired of the mess. People like him are exceedingly rare and never appreciated.
  • oaxacaoaxaca 5y ago
    >None of that is true. All of that is true about my Army experience lol. If I could go back and do it again, I'd definitely choose Air Force. I agree that the military can be a positive experience and it's a good idea for some people, but the caveat with my endorsement is that you gotta carefully choose the branch and the job. I almost chose linguistics, but for some silly reason chose mechanic and paratrooper, and wouldn't you know it I ended up with injuries causing me to walk with a cane in my 20s.
• alexanderballou 5y ago
  Voluntary participation in the military can be a great way to learn leadership skills that can translate to other occupations. No one should be forced to serve but it is possible that with the right motivation it can be beneficial to individuals and society.
• _tomasz 5y ago
  These are all valid points everything you said resonates with me. I was in the US Navy myself and have been out for 11 years during which time I've finished a Bachelors (thanks GI Bill), will be finishing a Masters here shortly (also in CS), and have been in tech the entire time. While the pay is great and intellectually fulfilling, a part of me certainly misses having contact with a broader cross-section of society and of doing things that give you purpose. I've been considering returning to a National Guard unit especially as I was born under Soviet occupation and the current events of the world highlight the growing threat of certain nations deciding to invade Eastern Europe.
  • throwawayafsp 5y ago
    Your reasons for missing service and considering returning ring very true with me. As someone who's been in tech for a decade now, the biggest obstacle to me is the 1-2 years of training and how that would affect my career and family. It seems harder for mid-career adults to enlist/commission once you're already in a career and trying to advance...
  • jwithington 5y ago
    Join the Navy reserves like me and find a unit that supports Sixth Fleet (Europe)! No need to go green (national guard).
    • _tomasz 5y ago
      hah, tempting but if I went back to the Navy reserves I'd try to go to dive school, but I'm well past the age for the Navy. For the Army and Air Force their max age is 39 waiverable so I have some time there though I'm too old to go pilot :(
  • schraeds 5y ago
    A nation with a GDP smaller than California and a lot of wound licking to do from their most recent foray just to keep things in perspective.
    • 5y ago
• ylkjt2 5y ago
  Is there anything similar in US for non-citizens? I am an immigrant (H1B) and would love to serve regardless of pay or other incentives.
  • Jtsummers 5y ago
    You need to be a permanent resident or citizen to join the US military. As an H1B visa holder you can apply for permanent residence, but you wouldn't be able to join the military until you have received that status.
  • dubbel 5y ago
    Maybe a volunteer fire department, Search and Rescue Unit or another local civil protection organization? I'm volunteering at my local "Sea Rescue" station as a boat commander (not in the US). I feel like I'm getting similar things out of it, that are described in the article, namely - leadership experience - taking decisions under pressure - contact with many different groups of society - feeling like I'm doing something concrete to help my community Even though I am sure Chris is a great guy and who is absolutely doing this for the right reasons, he mentions a "daring raid across the desert in Libya to rescue captured sailors". When you read about the dash, it ended with the "captors attempted to run away but were gunned down by the enraged British rescuers. The prisoners attempted to stop the killings but failed." Sure, that was a long time ago, but the guy commanding this raid still seems to be a fondly remembered role model for the squadron. Not because of the above war crime I'm sure, but they are overlooked in favor of a "daring dash". That is one of the issues I have with the military.
  • mardifoufs 5y ago
    That's pretty close to being a mercenary.
  • notch656a 5y ago
    I believe French foreign Legion, YPG, and possibly the Georgian National Legion (operating in Ukraine) accept non-citizens, although none of these are in the US. There is at least one foreign legion protecting Yazidis that does as well.
  • 5y ago
• jmyeet 5y ago
  So one of the things I like about Tiktok is you get exposed to something you normally wouldn't and it can be fascinating. One example of this I had an Air Force recruiter pop up on my fyp. This is obviously US-centric (as opposed to the article, which is the UK) but here are some things I've learned: 1. The difference between Reserve and Guard? Reserve is Federal, Guard is State (this was news to me); 2. Signing up for the Guard or Reserve is typically a 6 year commitment; 3. Your commitment begins when you sign up but you can defer your enlistment for up to a year; 4. You can sign up having completed your junior year in high school and defer training until after you graduate (which I think you have to anyway) but that's 1 of your 6 years down already; 5. Reservists get tuition assistance of up to $9,000/year; 6. Assuming a 4 year college degree and early enlistment, you can graudate with 5 years of your 6 year commitment done; 7. For one weekend a month and 2 weeks a year, you typically get $250-300/month (plus active duty pay where appropriate); 8. You also get medical and dental insurance. As ridiculous as the US college system is in terms of cost, I'm happy things like this exist to at least give people more options. If you go to college, the above can amount to $50,000 plus benefits over a 6 year period.
  • mschuster91 5y ago
    > As ridiculous as the US college system is in terms of cost, I'm happy things like this exist to at least give people more options. The only people I want in an army are those who have freely and independently chosen to join the army and who have been psychologically and physically checked to be fit for service. The motivation of a soldier should exclusively be to serve their country, not financial or status (e.g. citizenship) gain. People who have "chosen" because they have no other perspective to rise in life later-on should they survive their service or because they were pressured to do so by their family or friends have no place in the armed forces. An army should strive for excellence - Putin's troops are the current showcase for entire generations to see what happens otherwise.
    • yywwbbn 5y ago
      ‘ The motivation of a soldier should exclusively be to serve their country, not financial or status (e.g. citizenship) gain.’ No successful professional military has ever worked like this. Basically you want a an army comprised mainly of fanatical nationalists whose only purpose is to ‘serve their country’ (whatever that means). Hate it to break it to you but such a force would more closely resemble the Waffen SS, rather than the citizen militias of colonial America or ancient Greece. A modern professional military should mainly made up from balanced and educated professionals to be effective. People like this usually have other choices in life and thus need certain incentives to join. Not saying serving you country shouldn’t be a part of it, but for most such people that alone is not enough. For that you either need to decrease the general size of the army dramatically or find other ways of ‘motivating’ new recruits to ‘join’. The second options has not historically resulted in anything resembling ‘ excellence’ outside of ultra-militaristic, jingoist societies.
• ksec 5y ago
  >Most people have some big misunderstandings about what the Army is like, and some have a very negative reaction to the whole idea. "Some" in Tech is likely an understatement. At least pre Ukrainian Russia War era. I wonder, if there are the anything from compiler optimisation that could be applied to running an Army and vice versa. The closest thing I got to the Army was CCF. Something I wish my kids could experience as well.
• shantnutiwari 5y ago
  > First of all, nobody ever shouts ‘sir yes sir’. Yeah, that myth comes from Hollywood's portrayal of US Marines-- I dont know if actual US Marines are like that, but that's certainly how Hollywood (and most fiction) portrays them.
  • Bahamut 5y ago
    In the Marine Corps you never do a sir sandwich - that gets corrected in boot camp or beforehand for the few that do do that.
    • 0des 5y ago
      Don't ask don't tell was a long time ago. Sir sandwiches are fine.
  • chrisBob 5y ago
    As an Army officer, I didn't say `sir yes sir` very much, because most people don't like a sir sandwich. I did say "Hoorah" (Who-Ra) a lot.
  • robwg 5y ago
    The closest accurate Hollywood portrayal IMO would be the series "The Pacific". As far as shouting something similar to "sir yes sir" that typically can be found from boots(folks who havent deployed yet).
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• omaranto 5y ago
  Are people that use the word "explainer" just unaware of the word "explanation"? Also, what do those people call someone who explains? "Explainerer"?
  • AdrianB1 5y ago
    There are multiple dialects of English language and the author is definitely not from California.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• Imnimo 5y ago
  >I think a country absolutely must be able to fight to defend its people and friends. Does this really feel like an accurate description of what the British military has done over the past, say, 20 years?
  • simonh 5y ago
    Yes it does. Was Afghanistan better off before the pull out, or now under the Taliban? Iraq is a mess, sure, but at least nobody is gassing whole cities and we can be immensely proud of the liberation of Kuwait although that was more than 20 years ago. Right now we are providing vital military assistance to Ukraine, and I wish we were doing a lot, lot more. The failures were political ones. Militarily the army did the job it was given efficiently, ethically and professionally. I'm not saying it's perfect by a long shot and in war mistakes often mean deaths, it should be held to account where necessary, but what organisation is flawless?
    • basisword 5y ago
      >> Was Afghanistan better off before the pull out, or now under the Taliban? Why is that the comparison? The comparison should be was Afghanistan better off before we invaded in the first place. And committed war crimes. And radicalised a tonne of people who then came into Europe to murder civilians. You'd have to do mental somersaults to justify the Iraq + Afghanistan wars and think they were the right choice.
      • DonaldFisk 5y ago
        Before the 2001 invasion, Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban. Invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a different matter. At that point, Iraq didn't have WMD, and wasn't harbouring Al Qaeda, so the invasion was unjustified.
        • simonh 5y ago
          The 2003 invasion is obviously contentious. I’d argue we should have done it the first time, but that’s moot.
• Justsignedup 5y ago
  The saddest thing is the #1 reason why people join the military in the US is financial or college assistance. Shows why the US is so hesitant to provide UBI or Free college. We'd lose one of our biggest recruiting tools. If the US Military can appropriately show why people should be enthusiastic about joining, I'd be much more positive about it. Also I have ex-military friends... Getting that college funding isn't easy. The health insurance they provide for you is sub-par (I know a lady who had Indemetriosis, and was completely untreated and in excruciating pain for years because... they just don't understand female anatomy at the VA hospitals apparently)
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • freedomben 5y ago
    college is definitely a top reason people join, but anecdotally I don't think it's number 1 (though any data on the subject would be interesting). It's also very complicated because there are almost always multiple reasons at play, and usually they change as you go. I joined because I was homeless and floating around from crappy and physically demanding jobs, and I wanted to GTFO of where I grew up. After a couple of years though, college became the most important reason to me.
    • rhinoceraptor 5y ago
      The real number 1 reason is to get a 96 month loan on a Dodge Charger :)
      • micromacrofoot 5y ago
        This is so prevalent that the military actually spends a significant amount of money trying to educate young recruits about predatory car loans. Dealerships know they're easy marks and have been funneling them into the debt pipeline for decades.
• loxs 5y ago
  The most bizarre thing in the article for me (as a total layman) is that linked Jackal vehicle[1]... It's an armored vehicle which does not protect the... crew??? Why is it armored at all? Why are they not just using a Toyota Hilux instead of this 7 tonne monster? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal_(vehicle)
  • pjc50 5y ago
    It is basically a big technical, isn't it? It appears to be the replacement for the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snatch_Land_Rover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snatch_Land_Rover , which got its name from the use by military units grabbing civilians off the street in Northern Ireland.
    • loxs 5y ago
      Yeah, but I don't get the concept at all... why use this kind of vehicle, why develop it at all? What is the benefit of having the crew so exposed and how is it a good idea at all?
      • chrisseaton 5y ago
        > Our Jackal vehicles are lightly armoured so that we can see more and use our weapons more freely. Armour is a trade-off. More armour means less manoeuvrability and less ability to fight. You could completely encase yourself in a foot of steel if you wanted and just sit there on the battlefield, but you wouldn't be able to achieve anything.
  • evancox100 5y ago
    Your comment is not really worth responding to, since the article you linked addresses all your points/questions, but the armor is on the bottom to protect the crew from IEDs.
• basisword 5y ago
  >> I originally joined the British Army full-time after finishing my masters in computer science at Bristol in 2007. At the time, the campaign in Afghanistan was in full-swing, and the campaign in Iraq was still running. All my peers were going into office jobs in London but I still wanted more fresh air at that point in my life. I just cannot understand this mindset. "I wanted to see the world so instead of taking a gap year I thought I'd go to the middle-east and do a bit of invading".
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • AllegedAlec 5y ago
    You're exactly the kind of tech person he felt like needing to explain this to.
    • basisword 5y ago
      I don't see what 'tech person' has to do with it. Personal opinions on the military are pretty basic ethical decisions.
      • AllegedAlec 5y ago
        Because you start out from the standard tech person position of arrogance. You didn't try to argue why you think his decision was ethically wrong. You went for a smug soundbite that sounds glib and clever.
        • basisword 5y ago
          1. He chose to join in 2007 - during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Those are both wars that, in my opinion and the opinion of many others (evident by the massive protests at the time) the British should not have been involved in. 2. In my opinion, anybody that joins the army when they aren't defending against an invasion (i.e. someone who travels thousands of miles to fight another country nowhere near their own) has a screw loose. There are times when fighting is necessary (e.g. WW2, Ukraine/Russia). There have been few of those times recently. 3. I have friends who have friends + relatives in the military. I've met those people at social events. I can't obviously say they represent all people in the military but the ones I've met have all been racist, homophobic and worse. Again, I believe you have to have a certain mentality to join the military when your country isn't actually at risk and this has been bore out by the people I've met. 4. The British military has committed countless crimes and atrocities over the last 50 years. I can't respect anyone who would decide to be part of that institution when it is not necessary to be.
• throw8383833jj 5y ago
  It's commendable that he's explaining some things the average person probably doesn't understand. He also explains why a military is needed. In the US, I think a lot of people may have a negative opinion of the military/defense in general because in the last 20 years it's been used more offensively (at least the stuff covered in the media) than defensively.
• PoignardAzur 5y ago
  The author is... very nonchalant about the ethical aspect of his calling. From the sanitized language (the "destroys the enemy through mounted close combat" euphemism kind of glosses over the killing part of said combat), to the almost smug dismissal of pacifists, I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric being put into deflecting the criticisms of the military without actually addressing them. Like... the author mentions the Peterloo Massacre, the Boer War, and the Iraq War, and completely blows past them, and then goes on to explain how good the military is at building character and stuff. And I have no doubt it's true, but somehow I don't think Iraqis were especially thrilled to know the foreign troops occupying their country were from socially and economically diverse backgrounds. Speaking as someone who supports my own country's government, mostly supports my country's military involvement abroad, and would enroll (hopefully) without hesitation if our territory were invaded, I've considered taking military-related jobs in the future, and I still might. But if I did, it would be because I decided the positive outcomes of France's military interventions outweighs the negatives; which, given our past exactions, and the current state of Lybia, is... not at all obvious. My moral calculus certainly wouldn't be "on the one hand we're destabilizing poorer countries for cheap oil, but on the other hand the army sure pushes me out of my comfort zone and that's great".
  • adewinter 5y ago
    This article was about the author's reasons for joining the military, not sure why you expect it to also be about the detailed history of a particular unit or the general ethics of being a modern soldier?
    • PoignardAzur 5y ago
      Because ethics aren't something you hang up on a rack when your shift starts and pick back up when you go home. If you saw someone post about all the cool technical aspects of their job designing a marketing app for a tobacco company, your first reaction might be "Wait, is this really something you should be working on?". At least it would be mine. And if the author included bits like "Tobacco companies need apps too" and "I've heard extremists ask me if I liked poisoning children" and "If it wasn't me, it would still have to be someone", I would question how much they have really thought about the ethical aspect of their work. Yes, I expect someone who joined the military and wants to convince me that's a great thing to do and I should do it too to spend a bit more time on the general ethics of being a modern soldier.
• jokethrowaway 5y ago
  That's great and I'd love to defend my country. I don't care about doing missions somewhere else in the world though. War is mostly killing random people just because politicians decided so and it would be impossible if stealing money from people through taxes wouldn't be so widespread, easy and accepted. The cost of war is always socialised and it's huge. I think the ideal way to defend society is to teach everyone how to fight, allow people to own guns and have a small army branch to do monitoring / deploy army leaders to assemble people when the enemy is approaching and organise local combat. There are tons of things to consider (think about airborne / naval defense) but that's something we can figure out, without having to steal profits for people and funnelling in war machines that are rarely used for defense. I'd be happy to chip in money to make sure we have anti-air weapons to fight the neighbouring country fighter jets, in case they invade us. Instead what's happening is that the government spend my money, buy weapons and then give them to the Taliban, another country or use them to go and kill people in the middle east - without me having any say on the topic. The top-down approach of the army and its reliance on corrupted governments makes it so that soldier are, most of the times, just an armed gun for the mafia you call government.
  • JoeAltmaier 5y ago
    There's a difference between being willing to die defending your country, and willing to kill to defend yourself. That's critical to understand. Until then, I suggest sticking to paintball.
• JoeAltmaier 5y ago
  My son was Army Reserve (US), did a tour in Iraq back in the day. He reported that Reservists didn't get the respect of regular Army, at least in his unit. They got shot at, shot back, did convoy duty, got blown up (twice). But somehow not 'real soldiers'. His unit got no commendations or promotions from the regular army base commander. He returned, still had enlistment period left, went straight to the Army Recruiting office and signed up regular. Went well after that - at least the career part. He eventually got a medical discharge for his accumulated injuries. At the time was at Ft Benning, driver for the Sgt. Major of that base, a Sgt. himself. Got a Mechanical Engineering degree from state college, GI Bill, and is marrying a doctor. So all's well that ends well.
  • scruple 5y ago
    The treatment of reservists, in OIF specifically, across the board -- from active duty service members all the way up the chain to top military leadership and the GWB admin -- was disgraceful. I saw a little bit of it first hand when I was enlisted. FWIW, they're all real soldiers in my eyes.
    • giantg2 5y ago
      The odd part of that is that many of the reservists were active duty, including combat veterans, and then moved into reserves. So it's not like they haven't seen stuff.
    • 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      In Marine Infantry School we would have regular brawls with the future weekend warriors it was quite funny.
    • sennight 5y ago
      It was well deserved in my experience. Toward the end of my deployment, statistically the most dangerous period due to complacency setting in, we had to take over an AO that the Army had given to reservists for a year. They'd been reporting for months that all was quite, so we were looking forward to an uneventful weeklong left-seat/right-seat transition. They no joke met us going the other way as our convoy moved into the old British airfield they were using as a FOB, and we soon found out why they were so desperate to put distance between us and themselves: everything that could be wrong was wrong. Total indian country, their patrol routes got tighter and tighter as they'd just never return to an area they got attacked, they hadn't left the FOB for a month. Piles of unmarked UXO, serialized weapons hidden in elephant grass... a total nightmare. The first few days we got a lot of direct fire engagement on patrol, which NEVER happened - but the locals quickly figured out that, unlike Army reservists, infantry Marines take that sort of thing personally - and they fell back to the familiar coordinated IED attacks.
• Gollapalli 5y ago
  Great read.
• systemvoltage 5y ago
  > I meet a lot of people in tech who tell me with a straight face that they genuinely think we should just unilaterally disband the Army right now, and cannot comprehend why I’d have anything to do with it. At RubyConf 2014 someone in the lunch queue asked what I did before I was in tech and asked me if I enjoyed killing babies when I explained. I think Silicon Valley has a lot to learn from this. I worked with a defense contractor (one of the largest ones), designed parts in military airplanes and always found it uncomfortable to share this history of mine after moving to SV. What I did was so cool and always wanted to contrast it with software engineering (which is also cool sometimes but in a totally different way). I was met with tremendous guilt, disdain and unfair judgement of my character. The whole thing would flip after I explain to them that the airplanes I worked on were used for search and rescue recon. SV is myopic and politically fraught, sorry to say.
  • adolph 5y ago
    "a lot of people in tech . . . think we should just unilaterally disband" Not SV, but similarly myopic: https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/dell-apple-should-close-shop/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/dell-apple-should-cl...
    • systemvoltage 5y ago
      I’m not following, what’s Dell vs Apple in 1997 has to do with disdain for working on Defense in SV? I want to clarify: there is still a massive spectrum from people working on Defense in SV and the types of engineers I interacted with (Googlers). What I find incredibly worrying is that the people that have disdain for Defense, it is sort of shallow and the main motive is to use it as a moral-superiority weapon against people that are on the receiving end. It’s free points to score with their colleagues. This is truly despicable behavior and I’ve seen it first hand. Fortunately, I’ve always been able to avert the discussion and diffuse it before it gets worse. But it has left with me a sort of a chilling effect. Not being able to express one’s history, however marred it is in the opinion of the listener. This was not the case in places I’ve lived (East coast). Anyhow this thread is a way for me to share my grievances, for those listening please be kind to people that may not share your political or philosophical background. They’re not all baby killers.
• photochemsyn 5y ago
  The most important thing to realize about military service is that you sign away all your citizenship rights (free speech, etc.) when you sign up for the service. Hopefully you won't be used in ridiculous debacles like the 2003 Iraq Invasion, based on lies about WMDs pushed by Washington (and see British role as well), but you'll have no say in the matter. The other thing to realize is that, at least in the USA, they'll do everything they can to deny you medical benefits for injuries suffered in basic training, and this will persist after you get out, i.e. Veteran's Administration health care is pretty poor by all accounts. You can't just trust the system to look out for your interests in this area. In addition, the 'educational assistance' is barely enough for a two-year vocational training program, certainly nowhere near enough for a full four-year college degree. It's better than nothing, certainly, but the advertising and the reality have a big disconnect. If you're a teenage with zero alternative options and are completely desperate for a way out of an urban slum nightmare or a poverty-stricken rural life, the military is there as an option. I was once in a similar situation but I rejected military service because I'd heard too many Vietnam vets tell horror stories about how they'd been treated by the military. It wasn't much better for those who had to serve more recently in Afghanistan and Iraq, for equivalently dubious reasons.
  • dawsmik 5y ago
    I think there is some incorrect information in this post. I know people who have completed their Bachelors and Masters completely funded by the GI Bill, including living expenses. In the experience of the people I know, the VA goes out of their way to give benefits as needed. One case, in particular, they were granted 100% disability for life with a packet submission and one phone call.
    • scottshamus 5y ago
      Agreed. Even if your GI bill doesn’t technically cover all of your expenses, many schools have Yellow Ribbon Programs that waive any excess cost https://www.va.gov/education/about-gi-bill-benefits/post-9-11/yellow-ribbon-program/ https://www.va.gov/education/about-gi-bill-benefits/post-9-1...
    • 5y ago
• robertlagrant 5y ago
  I hope that the recent moral turn against all military work in US big tech has abated now with the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
• exdsq 5y ago
  I had quite a lot of fun in the Army Reserve in England (6 Rifles, B Company) while I was a teenager (17.5 - 19.5). Being paid to spend my weekends running around a field, camping, and shooting was a lot better than alternatives like working in a shop. I do partly regret not joining a deployment (some of my buddies went on Herrick XIII) but I still toy with the idea of rejoining in the future so maybe one day.
• doodlebugging 5y ago
  >What is the Yeomanry anyway? >In 1797 the Kingdom of Great Britain feared an invasion by the French. You may think of the British as always having a large standing Army, but it was relatively small at the start of the Napoleonic era. To give a better chance of defending the nation against invasion, volunteer units of part-time soldiers were formed to serve only within Great Britain. Infantry were easy to form as they just needed weapons and other basic equipment, but cavalry posed a problem in that it needed trained horses. A way to get these was to borrow them from local farmers and country estates. As an American I interpret this to mean that the British took to heart a lesson learned from their recent experience in the American Revolution. I am reminded of this particular amendment to the US Constitution which was ratified by the US states in late 1791, a few years before the establishment of the Yeomanry. >Amendment II >A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Codifying this amendment in the Bill of Rights is the cornerstone for guaranteeing that trained individuals could be available to the United States should an external threat to the security of the new country arise. This amendment has obviously become a trigger and a political dividing line here in the US. It's a shame. It is the one amendment of all of them that guarantees that a random collection of individual citizens drawn from any random locality can be quickly made ready to serve their country as an effective fighting force if called upon to serve. Perhaps it is seen as too outdated, too permissive, etc. though in fact it is short and sweet defining the important desired outcome - (A well regulated militia,) the reasoning behind the need for that outcome - (being necessary to the security of a free state,) the specific right granted - (the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.) It would have been awesome if they had laid out the responsibilities of the citizenry who exercise this right and the types of arms permissible for a citizen to keep and bear. I'm sure we can figure it all out in time. I'm not holding my breath though and you shouldn't either.
  • emmelaich 5y ago
    I thought the meaning of the 2nd amendment is now not solely understood as needing a well regulated militia. It is presented as an example of the benefit. So a modern sentence would be something like The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. For example, it is required if a well-regulated militia is to be assembled. Thus disconnecting the "well-regulated militia" idea as the sole justification.
• frankfrankfrank 5y ago
  I won’t mince words; it is unquestionably immoral and evil to join or even support the American military in any capacity in its current form. I say that as someone with direct knowledge and experience, and someone that is not “left” or subscribes to the whole “America always was evil” nonsense, even though there is a legitimate angle to that claim too. The American military is a lying, conniving, duplicitous, war mongering, murderous entity just like the whole American government has ever increasingly become. The institution and its diabolical leaders want your skills and your soul. Make that deal with the devil as you see fit. There, I said my piece/peace. Make of it what you want.
  • stangles1 5y ago
    I question the relevance of your point to this article, which speaks exclusively of the British Army Reserve, specifically the Cheshire Yeomanry.
    • mardifoufs 5y ago
      The british army also invaded iraq.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• juanani 5y ago
• alexashka 5y ago
  Meh. There are people willing to go kill strangers when someone tells them to. That's what they are. What I am, is someone who understands that without people like that, we would have world peace. Now if your desire is so great, that it is more important than world peace, fair enough. If maybe it isn't, think on it, will ya? :)
• inopinatus 5y ago
  If you peer at the photo very carefully you can see that the author is not in fact holding operations orders, but hard copy of a long discussion from bugs.ruby-lang.org regarding optimizations of the third implicit context
• cmrdporcupine 5y ago
  If I knew my country's armed forces were 100% a domestic defense and emergency response force, I would absolutely have considered signing up when I was young. You learn good skills, and I see great value in some larger-than-self contribution to community there. My father is German and left Germany for good not long after doing his compulsory 1 year service. He hated it, and it was one of many factors that led to him emigrating. But one thing my aunts have told me is that before he joined he was a disorganized messy irresponsible person, and afterwards he was neat and structured. He is also an amazing marksman, which he learned there (before he left they were talking to him about advancing him through sniper training). He amazed my Canadian uncles when he went hunting with them. But even here, in Canada, the armed forces gets involved in adventures abroad which I can would characterize as "dubiously thought through" at best ... but "blatantly imperialist" at worst. Being deployed to Afghanistan or some other adventure that I could not support would both enrage and depress me.
  • pmoriarty 5y ago
    See "War Is A Racket" by Major General Smedley Butler: https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf
  • oneoff786 5y ago
    Yeah. I’ve grown up starkly anti military due to the kinds of fights the American military has fought in my lifetime. It’s been evil. Plain and simple. And yet, I’m glad we have a strong military given happenings in Ukraine. I would strongly support putting boots on the ground. To have the training necessary to join the volunteer defense forces in Ukraine or something similar resonates as a valuable, important skill. Hard to mix such feelings.
    • brandmeyer 5y ago
      In the US, the military doesn't choose the targets. Elected civilians do. The way to square those feelings is to direct them at the people who give the top-level orders, and the rhetoric used to support those orders to the public. There is an entire branch of ethics and philosophy dedicated to the topic: Just War Theory. The US interventions in Serbia and Kuwait were both well-justified in my eyes.
• jwithington 5y ago
  Thanks, this is really great. I'm in the US Navy reserves and it's fun comparing the similarities of our experiences.
  • chrisseaton 5y ago
    Thanks - some of the comments here that say we should literally unilaterally disarm just absolutely blow my mind. Can’t understand how they think that works in practice.
• somethoughts 5y ago
  It's interesting if there could be something similar to the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) but for emergency preparedness. In there Western portion of North America, it seems such things will be more needed going forward - whether it be prescribed burns or actual fire fighting. From an individual participant perspective - it'd seem like it'd scratch a similar itch - slightly dangerous, wilderness training, heroic and camaraderie building. From a societal perspective - there will always be natural disasters. Also some of the skills could be useful for national defense but not having to maintain an organization that's sole purpose is national defense seems like it'd be a huge benefit. Why not train the team and build camaraderie by fighting fires that need fighting versus expensive simulated war games. A Season with the Hotshots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6CP5SKQjzg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6CP5SKQjzg
• pmoriarty 5y ago
  Before joining the military you should at least watch Winter Soldier[1] and Why We Fight[3]. Also, you should know that "Since 9/11, Military Suicides Are 4 Times Higher Than Deaths In War Operations".[3] All things that military recruiters aren't keen to focus on. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzMeQGw4Bfs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzMeQGw4Bfs [2] - https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Fight-Gore-Vidal/dp/B088PVZHCV/ https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Fight-Gore-Vidal/dp/B088PVZHCV... [3] - https://www.npr.org/2021/06/24/1009846329/military-suicides-deaths-mental-health-crisis https://www.npr.org/2021/06/24/1009846329/military-suicides-...
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• Animats 5y ago
  Being in the reserves in a NATO country today means a good chance of being sent to reinforce the borders of NATO against an expansionist Russia.
• ilrwbwrkhv 5y ago
  All armies and troops should be abolished. We will look back with shame at our chimp ways.
• marssaxman 5y ago
  I am struck by the author's expansive comfort in the use of "we" to describe their military organization, even in the context of historical events. I have never felt such a strong identification with any organization I was actively participating in, much less with its existence before my involvement. I wonder what accounts for this.
• jasonladuke0311 5y ago
  > It’s sacrosanct that I tell the people in my Squadron what I want them to achieve, and not how to achieve it. They take a goal from me and then use their own initiative to make it happen. This is one of the qualities the military me with, and it has been so important to me that I constantly challenge my kids to do the same.
• VictorPath 5y ago
  > defend its people and friends Like the people in Derry marching to protest the internment of Irishmen without trial in concentration camps? Guess not, the Parachute Regiment shot into the crowd in 1972 and the Queen pinned medals on them. How about the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in India, or the Batang Kali massacre in Malaysia in 1948, and so on.
• stevenklein 5y ago
  thanks for sharing - found this super interesting
• blobbers 5y ago
  Question for you all: I'm coming into my forties, so if I want to volunteer for the reserve, I need to start now. Is it a ridiculous thought? If SHTF, I'd like to have some more useful life skills than typing at a computer. I do have responsibilities to my family, so it would not be an easy sell. That said, it does appeal to me. Thoughts? Opinions?
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • SaintGhurka 5y ago
    If your family responsibilities don't prevent you from going away for ~5 months for the initial training (depending on MOS), then it's not utter madness to join at 40 if you're in decent shape. It may be a pride-swallowing experience at first. You'd be thrown into a barracks with a lot of 17-20 year olds and you'd be treated like one of them. We had a 35 year old in my basic training. The trainers gave him only a tiny bit of slack. You'd also spend some time as a 40 year old private - which might get you some looks. Whatever you do, pick your MOS carefully. Look around and see what type of reserve and guard units are local because that's going to dictate your job choices. If there's nothing but infantry locally, then you're going to be infantry or something that supports them. If that's the case, be a medic. Everyone likes the medic.
• mcguire 5y ago
  "This is ‘mission command’ and violating it and micromanaging my Yeomen is a real taboo." In 1912, a guy by the name of Frank Schofield gave a lecture to the US Naval War College that was later published as a booklet called The Estimate of the Situation. (This was later blown all out of proportion, but I think the original is the clearest.) (http://edocs.nps.edu/dodpubs/topic/general/est-sit_1912.pdf http://edocs.nps.edu/dodpubs/topic/general/est-sit_1912.pdf) It's a very good way of setting up a mission command-style order: 1. Here's my understanding of the situation. 2. Here's what we need to do. 3. Here's the difficulties preventing us. 4. Here's the assets we have. 5. And therefore this is what I want done. (The person getting the order gets to go through a similar process to figure out how to do it.)
• kfrzcode 5y ago
  > It’s sacrosanct that I tell the people in my Squadron what I want them to achieve, and not how to achieve it. They take a goal from me and then use their own initiative to make it happen. This is ‘mission command’ and violating it and micromanaging my Yeomen is a real taboo. If you try to tell a Yeoman how to cross a piece of ground in their vehicle rather than telling them where to get to they’ll certainly let you know what their job is and what your job is. I feel like tech could really learn something from this. This is huge. "Commander's Intent" is something all team leads should set; trust your team to make decisions on the ground, because they all know the mission and understand they 'why.' This is pure Extreme Ownership in action - allow ownership over decisions by informing and providing direction.
• bob2222 5y ago
• chad_strategic 5y ago
  I spent 20 years in the USMC reserve, I enlisted while I was at high-end west coast liberal arts college in the first trimester. I felt college was a little too easy and lacked challenge. I went on to reenlist, become a chief warrant officer, start an MBA program, activate for OIF, become the first Combat MBA in Pepperdine History and retire after 20 years. I brought 2 ESGER complaints, due to harassment for being in the reserves. I missed out on civilian promotions, weekend parties, social events, etc. I still don't think I would have changed a thing. The experiences I have had shaped me into what I am today. The only thing close to my experience in the Marine Corps vs. the civilian world would be working on a start-up because they are fun and exciting and everyone is working as a team. Shout out to 5/14!
• langsoul-com 5y ago
  I thought the army reserve only trained once a year or once every few years. 100 days a year seems pretty intense, especially with an existing job.
• lnxg33k1 5y ago
  I think one of the biggest issues of our generation / society is that we see military personnel not as the rapist, civilian killing, perverts they never fail to show they are when in combat, but we see them as someone with a strong mind (where?), doing something noble in killing other human beings as tool of the wealthy / powerful You want to get out of your comfort zone? Be pushed to improve? Go do some sports, go play football, go play tennis, go play cricket
• mach1ne 5y ago
  As a male Finnish citizen, I have gone a year of conscript military training and am now in the reserve. Army life is perhaps the single most bizarre experience you can have in the West. Practically nowhere else do you lose control of your own life so completely.
• jzer0cool 5y ago
  Oorah! Was 1345 MOS here in U.S.
• sytelus 5y ago
  So the guy spends 100% of his time outside of his job at Shopify in constant training to fight some war someday. That day may not arrive for years, if at all. Still, he needs to go and spend all of his free time in some imaginary war exercises every week. I am unable to fathom in what way this is a good and worthwhile use of anybody’s time. I can understand needs of many people to satisfy their caveman style hunting instincts, to fight, to feel important, to feel brotherhood, to feel adrenaline rush, to fund their education, to feel proud, to get medical insurance while rationalizing this entire enterprise beneath patriotism. To be honest, I haven’t understood the need for armies for “defense” (I understand it’s need for offense). If you want only defense, you should train every able citizen with basic and mandatory training with occasional refreshers. This makes a country with 10M+ population nearly undefeatable, even without nukes. Most countries can then get rid of 80% of the army this way and the associated costs. There is no need for human robots who act up in imaginary wars every day of their lives as their sole purpose and meaning. Human life hopeFully should mean something more than that.
  • chrisseaton 5y ago
    Who’s going to train all your citizens if you don’t have any professional soldiers? Who’s going to lead them? As the article says, the knowledge of how to fight can’t be generated from nothing on the day that you suddenly need it. You need some kind of cadre to maintain skills and knowledge.