[ SECRET POST #2043 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2043 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 083 secrets from Secret Submission Post #292.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Thanks for that very insightful and thought-provoking response. That's a lot to chew on.

I really do want to see combat, though. Is there any way I can ask for that, or will the placement exams more or less decide for me? For what it's worth, I'm in very good physical condition.

[honk]

overall the purpose of the exams is to show your higher ups what you're capable of, so that they can give you options based on your strengths. like people who score well in the mathematics questions will be offered jobs that will be specific to, say, engineering and such, but they'll also have more general options too.

for instance i am going into intelligence, that was a choice i was able to make. but intelligence requires more extensive training (it's twice as long on average as other areas) and background checks that would make the KGB faint.

generally recruiters want to know what career field you're most interested in, like aviation, intelligence, signal, etc. this helps them prepare you for the exams so that you end up earning those choices. the exams you take determine your eligibility for the military (super easy to pass) and what occupational specialties you qualify for.

combat positions are more easily accessible if you go into infantry, which is considered an occupational specialty. infantry positions, afaik, are offered to people who score high on the exams in general. if you talk to a recruiter about your desire to be in infantry, they'll help you figure out what you need to do regarding the exams in order to increase your chances of being offered an infantry position.

also being in good physical condition is great since it'll make BT all that much easier but BT's purpose is to shape up everybody so your current condition likely won't have much influence on your chances of making infantry from the exams (which take place before BT). an unfit person can be selected for infantry so long as they pass the initial weight requirement and, in the future, pass the physical fitness test at the ending of BT.

ETA: i should also add that if you are a woman, you will generally not be eligible for infantry positions :[ it's stupid but luckily they're easing up on these restrictions currently. artillery also sees combat, albeit from a greater distance, and women are allowed to do artillery.

[(Anonymous)]

Again, thanks for this. I'm really grateful for all of the information. I know it's probably available on their websites, but it's always good to get it from someone with firsthand experience.

[honk]

yeah, no problem! for most soldiers, their exam is the ASVAB. you can take practice ones for free on the military website here; it can be time consuming but it's honestly really easy.

the exam is actually (iirc) a compilation of 9 sections, it's kinda like the SAT. each section has specific questions, like one is about electronics for instance. your scores on each of these will determine what you're best suited for. different branches have different methods of scoring. for the army, which is what i'm assuming you're most interested in, they have like 10 or 11 different scores they use, and if you want to see combat, combat operations and special forces are the scores you should focus the most on.

[(Anonymous)]

I hate to say this, but I've got wonder about the sanity of someone who really wants to see combat. Going in to the military is one thing, but actively desiring combat situations? It seems strange to me.

[(Anonymous)]

Survival - killing and dying - is part of the quintessential human experience, but it's something we've removed from our daily lives almost everywhere we can. I want to test myself where it really matters and see what I'm made of. Is that really so strange?

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. Why don't you go shoot up a movie theater or something? I guess you need a socially sanctioned kind of killing to stroke your itch, right?

I'm being facetious but really, anon, you worry me. If you want to test yourself where it really matters why not become a doctor or nurse? That would be challenging and would make death part of your daily experience.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think shooting a room full of unarmed, innocent people would be a "challenge". If you conflate being a murderer with being a soldier you worry me, anon.

And I'm not smart enough to become a doctor or a nurse. I'd never made those grades, or I'd think about it. Maybe something like a paramedic. But again, not smart enough. The police and fire department in my area aren't hiring because of budget cuts or I'd consider those too. The military's the only thing left to get the experience I want.

[(Anonymous)]

I know I'm way late here, but you don't have to be all that smart to be a nurse.

AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

(And not facetious one.)

Yeah, that still does seem abnormal. Killing and dying is either part of a baser human instinct (murder, war) or necessary when required by natural laws (for food). The desire to kill or die just to test yourself or check your humanity is an excuse for, I think, a glorification of combat. Doing what you have to while in the military is one thing. Really wanting to be in a combat situation where you may have to take a human life is a very misguided survival test. Especially when that human life is likely an equally misguided and scared insurgent who is shooting because he's been he thinks he has to. It's not right or moral to use combat as a survival test, imo.

Societies evolve and advance. Survival and the quintessential human experience is something different now. For many people, the daily struggle isn't killing, dying, hunting and gathering. Progress is a good thing, anon.

Re: AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

You may not think it's right or moral, but our society in general considers the taking of life in service of one's country morally acceptable, just as it considers the taking of life in self-defense or the defense of another, or in the name of justice, to be morally acceptable. I know I might get killed, but those are the risks. Anyone else who'd pick up a weapon and fight me clearly knows those risks, too. Therefore I don't really see the moral wrong.

I'm not saying our progress as a society isn't a good thing. It is. But I've wanted the experience of combat for a long time now, on a deeply personal level, and the military exists, and is a morally acceptable means of obtaining that opportunity.

Re: AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Uh, you barely answered ayrt's comment. You said 'society views it as morally acceptable'; as you know full well, not all of society does, and a lot of people who would see it as justified if you were, say, wanting to do this to feed a family or get through school would still be massively skeeved by the idea of someone signing up because they like the idea of killing people. You're just making an appeal to authority rather than explaining why you think it's justifiable.

Somebody 'knowing the risks' does not in any way excuse the effects of killing, which are felt not by the dead person (duh) but by those left behind - the real victims of war. I am creeped out to think that you're cool with the idea of inflicting that trauma on someone else's family, especially their kids who certainly would not 'know the risks'.

Re: AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

If some segments of society don't find it morally acceptable, they certainly don't do much to fight it. If I really thought my country was out wantonly murdering innocents for no just cause, I'd do a hell of a lot more to stop it than meekly holding up signs and marching in a few protests. The fact is, most of our society considers killing in the context of national security morally acceptable, and both our laws and international laws condone it. I'm well within legal, social, and moral norms to participate.

They knew the risks to their family before they picked up a weapon. So do I. If you're worried about being left behind, discourage your brother/father/son from fighting. My parents are fine with it. They know the risks, too.

Re: AYRT

[honk]

war is a fact of life. i personally would rather someone be comfortable with this reality than serve under the delusion that war isn't necessary. oftentimes that's one less person traumatised by their experiences, should they face horrific danger. i agree that servicemembers should do what they must because it's integral to their own survival; no servicemember should ever take rash actions for the sake of the experience alone. but the military is a job that has to be filled by somebody, and the government wants those somebodies to be mentally and physically fit for it. that's all.

it may not be ethically justified, joining for the thrill, and many times people like this don't make good soldiers. but at the end of some days, someone has to take life. that's war for you. regardless of their opinion on the act, a soldier's decisions should be judged based on whether or not they did their job effectively and with caution.

your argument seems to be rejecting war as a necessary construct, and you are entitled to that opinion, but make no mistake - the taking of life in combat happens to everyday people that are serving, regardless of their reason for doing so. dismissing someone's motivations for serving usually won't save lives.