We can't win

[Lord Jim]

Mr. Mother Fucker

It's nice to see a little formality and politeness finally being injected into the discourse on this board...

[liberty]

... I remember a joke by a black comedian that went something like this: I was in the military I wanted to go for twenty, but then there was a war...

I don't quite get the joke. Maybe if I had some context... who was this "black" comedian?

If I had remembered his name, I wouldn’t have needed the description. He is a minor comedian and the venue was something like the comedy club. I didn’t think it was funny either but the audience did.

[Joe Guy]

Those black troops would stand out too much in the white Arctic snow. They wouldn't be good soldiers to use in the Russian/US war unless they're used as decoys.

[liberty]

Mr. Mother Fucker

It's nice to see a little formality and politeness finally being injected into the discourse on this board...

Jim, you don’t think I used the proper respect. I capitalized his name what else could he want?

[rubato]

Well Mr. Mother Fucker I was referring to the society in general, but since you brought it up blacks are underrepresented in combat arms about 3 or 5 of their military population. Exactly why that is the case I don’t think anyone can say for sure. It just might be the politically correct but military leaders tend to say that is caused by the desire of black recruits to obtain civilian applicable vocational skills.. If that was the case it would seem that there would near zero reenlistment for blacks in the military. In that case we would have heard about it.

And your Vietnam era example is useless since then there was a draft then and a draft now is not possibly.

... "

Historically Blacks were kept out of combat positions because of racism. And we can say this for sure. See WWII.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_ag ... ._military

World War II

During World War II, African-American enlistment was at an all-time high, with more than 1 million serving in the armed forces.[8] However, the U.S. military was still heavily segregated.The marines had no blacks enlisted in their ranks. There were blacks in the Navy Seabees and the United States Air Force (Tuskegee Airmen). The army had only five African-American officers.[8] In addition, no African-American would receive the Medal of Honor during the war, and their tasks in the war were largely reserved to noncombat units. Black soldiers had to sometimes give up their seats in trains to the Nazi prisoners of war.[8]

It would take over 50 years and a presidential order before the U.S. Army reviewed their records in order to award any Medals of Honor to black soldiers. This war marked the end of segregation in the U.S. military. In 1948 President Truman signed Executive Order 9981, officially ending segregation and racial inequality in the military.

yrs,
rubato

[liberty]

Well Mr. Mother Fucker I was referring to the society in general, but since you brought it up blacks are underrepresented in combat arms about 3 or 5 of their military population. Exactly why that is the case I don’t think anyone can say for sure. It just might be the politically correct but military leaders tend to say that is caused by the desire of black recruits to obtain civilian applicable vocational skills.. If that was the case it would seem that there would near zero reenlistment for blacks in the military. In that case we would have heard about it.

And your Vietnam era example is useless since then there was a draft then and a draft now is not possibly.

... "

Historically Blacks were kept out of combat positions because of racism. And we can say this for sure. See WWII.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_ag ... ._military

World War II

During World War II, African-American enlistment was at an all-time high, with more than 1 million serving in the armed forces.[8] However, the U.S. military was still heavily segregated.The marines had no blacks enlisted in their ranks. There were blacks in the Navy Seabees and the United States Air Force (Tuskegee Airmen). The army had only five African-American officers.[8] In addition, no African-American would receive the Medal of Honor during the war, and their tasks in the war were largely reserved to noncombat units. Black soldiers had to sometimes give up their seats in trains to the Nazi prisoners of war.[8]

It would take over 50 years and a presidential order before the U.S. Army reviewed their records in order to award any Medals of Honor to black soldiers. This war marked the end of segregation in the U.S. military. In 1948 President Truman signed Executive Order 9981, officially ending segregation and racial inequality in the military.

yrs,
rubato

That was then and this is now. In WW II, blacks were not wanted in combat and now they don’t want to be in combat. Blacks make up about 20 % of the military but only about 3 or 5% or so of combat arms. These statistic are hard to come by they are like some kind national security secret. But at any rate they are underrepresented in combat arms; they don’t want to serve in combat or at least not enough to volunteer.

But this is not about the black population of the US it about the people in general and what is seen in the military can be applied to the nation as a hold. They will not fight and liberals have destroyed our tactical nukes so our only options would be the use strategic nukes on the battle field or defeat. Would you be willing to pollute the world with plutonium in order to deny the Russians victory? I wouldn’t.

[ex-khobar Andy]

I'd never heard this; and usually sometimes with lib's posts there is a grain of truth, however tiny, which has to be separated from the chaff of mendacity it is surrounded with. So I did a little googling.

In less than 60 seconds I came across this in Wikipedia, which is always right.

"Blacks suffered disproportionately high casualty rates in Vietnam. In 1965 alone they comprised almost one out of every four combat deaths.[74][75]"

Silly me for even trying to see if there was any substance to lib's outlandish claims.

[Econoline]

In WW II, blacks were not wanted in combat and now they don’t want to be in combat. Blacks make up about 20 % of the military but only about 3 or 5% or so of combat arms. These statistic are hard to come by they are like some kind national security secret.

Which of course immediately raises two questions: (1) If this statistic is “like some kind national security secret” where did *YOU* find it??? (Link, please!) and (2) Even if your statistic is correct, *HOW* do you know *WHY* Blacks are under-represented in combat arms—and whether it is by their choice or because of still-lingering institutional racism???

[RayThom]

I'm not positive but I think most of what Mr. liberty posts here is made from whole cloth.

He never runs out of shit to say and amuse us with.

[Scooter]

How does one enlist in the armed forces and decline a combat role by choice?

[liberty]

I'd never heard this; and usually sometimes with lib's posts there is a grain of truth, however tiny, which has to be separated from the chaff of mendacity it is surrounded with. So I did a little googling.

In less than 60 seconds I came across this in Wikipedia, which is always right.

"Blacks suffered disproportionately high casualty rates in Vietnam. In 1965 alone they comprised almost one out of every four combat deaths.[74][75]"

Ex, what is your agenda I said nothing like that and I think you know it. It is off the subject but I don’t deny it. In world War II they were underrepresented and in Vietnam they were overrepresented in combat units. Was it racism in both cases. In World War II Southerner in congress opposed black combat troops; they feared returning blacks with combat skills. During Vietnam recruits were given an aptitude test and were assigned duties accordingly. Or at least that is the way it worked for me. Most blacks scored lower on the test and ended up in a combat M.O.S. Now the test could have been fixed but I don’t believe or want to believe a military man would do that. Military men obey orders whether they like, agree with them or not.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Ex, what is your agenda I said nothing like that and I think you know it. It is off the subject but I don’t deny it. In world War II they were underrepresented and in Vietnam they were overrepresented in combat units. Was it racism in both cases. In World War II Southerner in congress opposed black combat troops; they feared returning blacks with combat skills. During Vietnam recruits were given an aptitude test and were assigned duties accordingly. Or at least that is the way it worked for me. Most blacks scored lower on the test and ended up in a combat M.O.S. Now the test could have been fixed but I don’t believe or want to believe a military man would do that. Military men obey orders whether they like, agree with them or not.

I don't really have an agenda except providing facts to counter lies if I find them. Lib I don't think that you are deliberately lying so much as just uninformed. You said, in a post above,

In WW II, blacks were not wanted in combat and now they don’t want to be in combat. Blacks make up about 20 % of the military but only about 3 or 5% or so of combat arms.

I assume, and maybe I am wrong, that you make this statement in order to bolster some sort of belief that blacks are in some sense cowardly. I can't see any other interpretation for "they don't want to be in combat." I think your statement (never mind your belief) is wrong but I looked up some data because I didn't know the real numbers off the top of my head.

There is an interesting table at https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf which gives the racial breakdown of casualties in the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the first (1990-1) Gulf War. This is from the Congressional Research Service updated in 2018. I can’t reproduce the table (Table 3 from the report) below but I’ll give the relevant numbers for war dead for white and black (African American) personnel only over all service branches. Korea 3027 B, 29271 W. Vietnam 7243 B, 49834 W. Gulf 66 B, 292 W. Now I don’t have numbers for the actual racial representation in the armed services, but it looks as if as a ratio, black:white deaths were 0.103:1 in Korea, 0.145:1 in Vietnam and 0.226:1 in the Gulf. I couldn't find data for WW2 and the report I cite notes that "Prior to the Korean War, race often went untracked." (Note to Table 3.)

it sure looks to me as if you are misinformed. There are really only two explanations for the statement you make. One is that you are an ignorant pigshit racist who will say and do anything to support your agenda. The second is that you are woefully misinformed (e.g., by Fox News and random idiots on the internet) and believe accordingly. I actually do not believe, and let me make this as clear as I can, that you are the first. I think that if someone gives you real verifiable information you might change your views. Which is why I am willing to spend half an hour or so looking up data.

[liberty]

Ex, what is your agenda I said nothing like that and I think you know it. It is off the subject but I don’t deny it. In world War II they were underrepresented and in Vietnam they were overrepresented in combat units. Was it racism in both cases. In World War II Southerner in congress opposed black combat troops; they feared returning blacks with combat skills. During Vietnam recruits were given an aptitude test and were assigned duties accordingly. Or at least that is the way it worked for me. Most blacks scored lower on the test and ended up in a combat M.O.S. Now the test could have been fixed but I don’t believe or want to believe a military man would do that. Military men obey orders whether they like, agree with them or not.

I don't really have an agenda except providing facts to counter lies if I find them. Lib I don't think that you are deliberately lying so much as just uninformed. You said, in a post above,

In WW II, blacks were not wanted in combat and now they don’t want to be in combat. Blacks make up about 20 % of the military but only about 3 or 5% or so of combat arms.

I assume, and maybe I am wrong, that you make this statement in order to bolster some sort of belief that blacks are in some sense cowardly.

Let me make this clear there are different race of mankind, but all races share the same basic instincts, desires and abilities. Peoples regardless of race or ethnicity differ only by culture. However some cultures are more advantageous than others. And in some cultures the members are more concerned with their own wellbeing than society as a hold. That is the state of this nation and not just the black community.

[rubato]

How does one enlist in the armed forces and decline a combat role by choice?

Good point, one doesn't.

The idea that blacks are choosing not to be in combat roles, or have the ability to do so, is an unintelligent racist lie.

yrs,
rubato

[Scooter]

If this statistic is “like some kind national security secret” where did *YOU* find it??? (Link, please!)

It was something he "heard" somewhere, like Europeans don't eat corn, and Canada was an ally of the Soviet Union.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Let me make this clear there are different race of mankind, but all races share the same basic instincts, desires and abilities. OK I have no problem with that. Of course there are people who have more than one race no matter how it is defined. And in another sense we are all of a single race because we are all descended from a single Mitochondrial Eve and a single Y-chromosonal Adam. Peoples regardless of race or ethnicity differ only by culture. You are going to have to define culture here; and if it's defined in the usual sense of a set of beliefs such as religion, musical preferences, ceremonial rituals and so on it’s either trivial or in fact wrong. There are people of different races who share more culture with each other more than I do even though I am (at least visually) identifiable with one of those races. For example, I think that African-race blacks who live in France have culturally more in common with the whites of French origin who live there than I do, despite the fact that by the usual usages of ‘race’ I would be presumed to share a racial type with most of the indigenous Frenchmen. However some cultures are more advantageous than others. I have no clue what this sentence means. Can you give me an example of a culture which is more ‘advantageous’ than another? And in some cultures the members are more concerned with their own wellbeing than society as a hold. I need a reference for this - it may be true for all I know but I don’t know for which culture(s) this is true. You started off with a statement that blacks avoid combat, which as far as I can tell is just not true at least in the examples of the Korean, VN and Gulf wars. So I presume that you are saying here is that black culture is more concerned with their own well being. Note how we have elided from race to culture with nothing in between. Maybe am wrong and you really are just a racist dipshit. But I am one of life’s optimists and I will continue to believe that you are not. That is the state of this nation and not just the black community. Again I have no clue what you are getting at here.

[liberty]

Ex, this is the best I can do.

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Officer-Un ... 1249882095

Although the integration of Blacks into the Army is a success story worth emulating, U.S. Army statistics indicate that Blacks do not participate evenly across officer career fields. In particular, Blacks are under-represented among the combat arms. This condition can be termed occupational segregation

In particular, Blacks are under - represented among the combat arms. This condition can be termed occupational segregation. The U.S. Army's
leadership is concerned about the low number of Black officers serving in the combat arms for two reasons. First, the low number of Blacks in the combat arms reduces the diversity and perhaps the credibility of the U.S. Army’s leadership. Second, it makes it difficult for Blacks to attain
appropriate representation among general officers because seventy-
two percent of the U.S. Armys generals are selected from the combat arms.
—
Emmett E. Burke
“Black Officer Under representation in Combat Arms Branches”
School of Advanced Military Studies
2002..

[Burning Petard]

Andy you have my sympathy. He simply cannot read with even 6th grade comprehension.

snailgate.

[liberty]

Ex, check this out; this guy spent 34 years in the army. If you can’t prove hIm a liar he should know what he is talking about. Blacks are underrepresented in combat arms.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/09/18/do ... -commands/
Don’t blame my Army for the lack of black officers in combat commands
By Petronius Arbiter Best Defense guest columnist It is a well-known fact that the Army has struggled for decades trying to get more black officers to reach the highest ranks of the Army and especially the combat arms. This should be a surprise to no one. But don’t go blaming the Army for the inability ...
By Thomas E. Ricks
| September 18, 2014, 2:37 PM

via Flickr/DoD
By Petronius Arbiter
Best Defense guest columnist
Trending Articles

History Will Remember George H.W. Bush Kindly
The United States owes a great debt to its 41st president.

Powered By
It is a well-known fact that the Army has struggled for decades trying to get more black officers to reach the highest ranks of the Army and especially the combat arms. This should be a surprise to no one.
But don’t go blaming the Army for the inability to solve this issue. This is a multi-faceted problem and one which must be solved involving all aspects of American society: Army, academia, family, and community leadership.
In trying to resolve this issue the Army has gone through excruciating efforts to recruit more black officers into the combat arms. The Army has not failed, but has not made much progress. Previously, while I was in a position to observe the branch assignments of one of the Army’s largest commissioning sources, it was apparent to me that there was little interest from the majority of minority men in going into the combat arms. In particular, black men were significantly underrepresented in the infantry, armor and field artillery branches. Correspondingly, the ADA, signal and logistics branches were overrepresented. As for explanations, none could be found.

In a previous life I was in a position to observe the intake of initial-entry soldiers into the Army.It became apparent rapidly that minorities of all types and black soldiers, in particular, were underrepresented in combat arms. We instituted an analysis of why and obtained no cogent results. Often we asked members of high-school academia how we could get more black men to enlist for the combat arms. They had no answer. We asked them why they thought young black men were not coming into the combat arms and their best guess, and only a guess, was that the community was sending them to where they could best obtain a skill transferrable to civilian life. Being a member of rifle squad, an M1 tank gunner, or a gunner on an M198 crew did not transfer well to civilian life, according to them.

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC) (circa 2009-2011) was tasked to examine this issue. You would have thought that this commission, made up mostly of active and retired black flag officers, other minorities, and women, would have taken it on. They seemed much more concerned with the issue of how to make more women four-star flag officers. They addressed the issue, scrutinized it, but admitted they had no solution. They also acknowledged that despite a higher attrition rate on black junior officers in the Army, there was no institutional bias that could account for the higher attrition. The MLDC actually just left this issue hanging like a chad in an election and continued to pursue their main purpose; finding a way to make more women senior flag officers.
Now, if you think the Army is the only service with this issue, think again. The Marine Corps has a similar issue with its combat arms, and the Air Force and Navy have the same difficulty, but within their own organizational structure.

But the issue of a lack of black senior leaders is probably greatest in the U.S. Special Forces. It is rare to see a black NCO or officer in the U.S. Army’s Ranger Regiment. It is rarer to see them in the U.S. Army Special Forces. I can only remember one black senior officer in U.S. Army Special Forces at colonel or higher. There may have been more, but it is doubtful there have been many. I can’t speak to the SEAL community with any real credibility, but I would be willing to bet they have at least as great a void of black representation as do the Army’s Special Forces, and I would bet this is a similar area of concern for AFSOC and MARSOC.

As for solutions, I doubt there are many, if any, or the Army would have solved this 40 years ago. For sure, forced appointment to the combat arms of black junior officers will only be counterproductive. Such an action will probably result in dissatisfied officers who will either attrite themselves by going into another branch, the Acquisition Corps, or leave the Army — or even worse, be forced to leave the Army. Being a professional and good combat arms leader is a choosing and a calling, not a result of a draft.

Over the years I have observed that the opportunity for black officers who obtain the rank of colonel in the combat arms to make general officer is significantly higher than that of their peers. So, maybe the approach to be made by the Army should be: If you want to be a field marshal, go into the combat arms. However, it is doubtful that approach will be productive in terms of increased unit effectiveness or combat readiness.

My take on this is that the Army is just going to have to endure with whatever happens. It is highly doubtful anything can be done to produce more black or other minority officers in combat arms. And guess what? The same issue, but probably on a greater scale, is going to occur with women, should the decision be made to go that direction.

"Petronius Arbiter" is a retired soldier who wore the uniform for over 34 years.
Thomas E. Ricks covered the U.S. military from 1991 to 2008 for the Wall Street Journal and then the Washington Post. He can be reached at ricksblogcomment@gmail.com. @tomricks1

[liberty]

Let me make this clear there are different race of mankind, but all races share the same basic instincts, desires and abilities. OK I have no problem with that. Of course there are people who have more than one race no matter how it is defined. And in another sense we are all of a single race because we are all descended from a single Mitochondrial Eve and a single Y-chromosonal Adam. Peoples regardless of race or ethnicity differ only by culture. You are going to have to define culture here; and if it's defined in the usual sense of a set of beliefs such as religion, musical preferences, ceremonial rituals and so on it’s either trivial or in fact wrong. There are people of different races who share more culture with each other more than I do even though I am (at least visually) identifiable with one of those races. For example, I think that African-race blacks who live in France have culturally more in common with the whites of French origin who live there than I do, despite the fact that by the usual usages of ‘race’ I would be presumed to share a racial type with most of the indigenous Frenchmen. However some cultures are more advantageous than others. I have no clue what this sentence means. Can you give me an example of a culture which is more ‘advantageous’ than another? And in some cultures the members are more concerned with their own wellbeing than society as a hold. I need a reference for this - it may be true for all I know but I don’t know for which culture(s) this is true. You started off with a statement that blacks avoid combat, which as far as I can tell is just not true at least in the examples of the Korean, VN and Gulf wars. So I presume that you are saying here is that black culture is more concerned with their own well being. Note how we have elided from race to culture with nothing in between. Maybe am wrong and you really are just a racist dipshit. But I am one of life’s optimists and I will continue to believe that you are not. That is the state of this nation and not just the black community. Again I have no clue what you are getting at here.

Next time please use red, I need text to stand out vividly.