4 ms·
I like it (unfortunately I am very far away now from ever being able to be that fit). Leaving aside the uncomfortable notion that it is all for killing people,
by facepalm 12y ago
I like it (unfortunately I am very far away now from ever being able to be that fit).
Leaving aside the uncomfortable notion that it is all for killing people, here is another question I wonder about: what are the survival rates for Navy Seals? Are they better/worse/the same as for normal soldiers? Does all the training help with survival? It would be a shame to go through all this and then be killed in the first hour of war by some stray bullet?
I don't mean to offend, I am genuinely interested. It seems fascinating if for example people are motivated to invest so much in training if the chance to die afterwards is high. Of course if it would reduce the risk it would also be a good motivator.
- jebblue 12y ago>> It would be a shame to go through all this and then be killed in the first hour of war by some stray bullet? It would be more of a shame to not have tried, to give up, that's what I think the point of the speech is.
- facepalm 12y agoOne could try less risky things?
- jebblue 12y agoFor how long? Weeks, months or years or even decades? Then you tell those children how long you thought it was OK for them to endure what they are going through right now.
- facepalm 12y agoNot sure what you mean? What children? You think the only worthwhile risks to take are the ones where you risk your life? Or do you mean you always risk your life anyway?
- MrMember 12y agoThat sort of information is likely classified. In any case I'm not sure how useful such information would be. They go through an insane amount of training that almost certainly would increase their survival rate in an average firefight, but the Navy doesn't spend ~$500k training a SEAL to send them into average firefights. They undertake some of the most dangerous missions in the US military.