/k/ - Weapons

12) The prevalent preferential sexism/racism 2.0. Don’t tell me you haven’t seen it. The platonic guy friend SNCOs with new female boots. The freaking homeboy back in the hood homeboys in the supply building. This shit has no place in the Corps.

13) The eagerness to counsel and punish when someone fucks up and then turning a blind eye when someone does something good. It is meant to be an equal system. Want to counsel someone for a fuckup? That’s fine. Just don’t exclusively use the system for punishment. It’s meant to be used for both or not at all.

14) Mass punishments: Because if a Marine goes off base, gets drunk and assaults a cab driver, it’s somehow my fault for not knowing that he was going to do that and preventing him.

15) 15 minutes prior to 15 minutes prior to 15 minutes prior… : Everyone in the Marine corps likes to say “You’re a grown man” yet they don’t even trust a marine with something as simple as being to work on time.

16) Armorers and the armory in general. Fuck everyone and everything about it. I’ve never seen an armorer that wasn’t on BCP. Don’t even get butthurt about this one. Just shut the fuck up, sit down, and admit it.

17) Chucks on Friday and pretty much everyone this last Commandant did.

18) TA getting cut. The Congress got a raise and our TA got cut. Just another public embarrassment. Applies to all branches.

19) Receiving NJP because of an incident that happened off base somehow doesn’t qualify as double jeopardy.

20) Imminent danger zone pay getting pro-rated by day. Just another way to nickel-and-dime the very people that volunteer for these bullshit deployments anyway. At least fucking pay us.

21) SNCOs that were nowhere near the shooting at Camp Bastion on Sep 15, 2012 nominating themselves for CARs and NAMs. You guys know who you are.

22) Junior enlisted marriages. We essentially bribe 19 year old kids (who are modestly paid and frequently away) to get married…GTFO the barracks + pay doubles + girlfriend from back home lives with you. It’s hard to say no. The marriages are generally badly matched between people too immature for the responsibility, finances are tight, babies are had, so the now Corporal with a toddler has to choose between EAS + uncertainty, or re-up and guaranteed paycheck. This logic is the start of many career guys’ decision to stick around…instead of retaining our best, we retain those who gave in to temptation and accepted the marriage bribe. As a result, our cream doesn’t rise to the top…the guys who need the job security rise to the top. Once there, they make shit decisions and make poisonous command climates, which perpetuates the cycle.

23) Manpower Assignments. Our system makes the assumption that central manpower managers make better decisions for the individual and the service than individuals can do. As a result, getting the right guy in the right billet is a matter of chance.

To be continued… If you have any ideas to add to or modify this list, please leave them in the comment section below.

24) No longer featuring knights in your recruiting ads

>ctrl+F "fights for israel"

>no results

>>532833

>>532821

>esprit de corps

Neither are the definition of esprit de corps.

It's hard to translate it properly in English (which is why it's not), if I had to do it it would be something like this, "the willingness of a group to work towards a common goal, usually the self interest of that group".

It has little to do with morale as a concept. It's linked because it's been observed that the individuals in a group with a strong esprit de corps are less likely to falter under pressure, which is why it's important for military units whose specialty will have a tendencies of placing them against poor odds.

The corps in this is not actually from a military corps, but from a ballet corps. Where everyone has to perfectly move according to it's individual part but making together something greater.

>>532821

>"The prevalent sexism. “Hurr durr, she sucked dick to get promoted.” C’mon. It’s the 21st century. Grow up."

>"The prevalent preferential sexism/racism 2.0. Don’t tell me you haven’t seen it. This shit has no place in the Corps."

I wasn't aware the USMC was accepting soyboys now. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Where were you when the marine corps went from being a strong, masculine fighting force to a gaggle of cuckolds and male feminists?

These aren’t necessary USMC but are still relatable imho.

24)Officer criteria: how is a 23 year old faggot that’s straight-outta-college with his degree in degeneracy studies more qualified than an NCO of the same age who spent the 4+ years developing relevent skills, to receive training in upper management?

25)Airborne school: Mass HAHO obsolete in modern warfare while we NEED a specialized HALO group, it remains an expertise taught to a very tiny minority (i.e ARSOF & friends) All HAHO does is induce peacetime attrition. Despite being more strategically useful, “leg” units get shit on emotionally and financially to feed the egos of the baby boomer brass and their WW2 nostalgia.

26)MOS waste. As a combatant, using me and my brethren to do POG bitchwork (i.e KP) while they fuck around during work ours. Leave grunt to grunt work.

27) Phenetic bias: “ideal body” meme aside, I’ve seen too many squared away dudes be put to the curb while the photogenic soldiers get their early promo waivers, regardless of actual capability and knowledge.

28)High ranking NCOs: much like the college system for commissioned officers, are unneeded. An officer shouldn’t need a separate advisior and warrants provide the expert aspect, so why is this a thing?

directly /k/ related complaints

29)M240x : holy shit, why is this obsolete coaxial weapon forced on dismounted soldiers? The M60, much like the eternal-armalite, has its flaws, but the latter was spared and made workable due to decades of refinement. Why replace a relatively light and balanced GPMG with a front heavy, poor barrel-to-overall length turd heaved together with FUCKING RIVETS is beyond me.

30)MK19: unsafe arming method, uses proprietary lube. Sear assembly is finicky to assemble.

MK47 exists now, so why is this still a thing?

32)M2A1 Browning: Yes, I said it. this bitch is a dust magnet with awkward manual of arms. Requires tools to field strip yes, a rod is a tool

33)M4A1: RIS and star chamber is near impossible to clean to spec without a dentist-grade dental pick. Non-free floated barrel. Issued magazines suck. Doesn’t take advantage of modern developments. Foreign soldiers laugh at it.

>>532905

>30)MK19: unsafe arming method, uses proprietary lube. Sear assembly is finicky to assemble.

>MK47 exists now, so why is this still a thing?

The rifle grenade in the US army and subsequently most of NATO is serious fuck up.

It's even worse when you know about it in details.

See after the Korean war it was decide that the old grenade rifle where too hard to use and something more modern and efficient could be done for the main infantry weapon (yes the main infantry weapon has been grenades since basically Napoleon, which is why "Grenadier" is the name of so many European infantry units. Rifles are used to scare infantry into cover, grenades are meant to blow them up once they're boxed in).

So a lot of thoughts went in and the 40×46mm multipurpose grenades were born. Low recoil, good enough effect on target, much simpler and efficient to use than the older stuff (and therefore much more accurate and useful in a fight).

Now they weren't happy with what fired the round, the M79, because it was single shot, problem ultimately solved by the China Lake Model, but by then the powers that be had decided that if it was single shot it was to be integrated on the gun and the M203 was born.

It was a POS, it made accuracy about as bad as older rifle grenades (negating the advantages of the round) because of the recoil not going to the stock… and so no-one was happy about it (and still isn't).

But wait there is more. Because Honeywell knew of the 40x46 round they knew that you could make a neat support weapon with that round and that if they made it inexpensive it was a sure sell. That's how the MK18 was born. It used any US mount, it was light, it was fucking simple.

Too simple. It's a manual belt fed grenade launcher. With a hand crank.

Now of course instead of correcting the few quirks of the early design (mainly the cheap belts) and be happy, the brass went "Hand cranks, what is this the 1800's?"

And immediately asked for a proper automatic version not the silly thing (that worked).

Which nobody was able to make. Because the 40x46 is a low velocity round. Because it's meant for the infantry.

And since no one seemed capable to do one with that round they allowed modification of the round and that's how the 40×53mm and the MK19 were born.

The MK19 had all the problems of the MK18 and none of the advantages (not cheap, not light, not using the standard ammo).

And so with the M203 and the MK19 being immediately recognized as OBVIOUS FAILURES that didn't fit the objective set (but will have to do for the ongoing vietnam war) the US military went into the quest for the Grenade Launcher, with a projectile that can be used in an automatic belt fed gun and as an infantry basic weapon, a quest of untold hundreds of Billions of $US flushed down a toilet somewhere in the Pentagon, that continues to this very day (to find shit that already exist).

>>532879

You realize your words slightly change when we adopt them?

You don't even have a word for entrepreneur. In your language it means contractor, we took it and made it mean "person whose occupation is starting small businesses and selling them" which no one had a definition for.

>>532940

Kek. Entrepreneur is french you moron. And it has ALWAYS meant that in french. An entrepreneur is someone who start an entreprise (old:"action with a risk that may yield a greater reward", since the last 400 years = a business) which you illiterate monkeys spell enterprise.

>>532945

Nope, once we made it popular you took the meaning, but the original meaning in french (pre english intervention) is just someone who works on contract.

>>532942

>at least 250k

Maybe if you go to some Ivy League school. Most state schools in the US cost $6k-$10k per academic year. For four years, that's $24k to $40k for a BA.

>>532961

>I know your language better than you

Niger didn't you literally do that here >>532879 in the most insulting way possible?

>>532820

>>532821

>muh sexism

>muh "racism"

Go back to reddit you faggot.

>not understanding mass punishments are used to make everyone angry and induce peer pressure to stop the asshole from being a faggot

>>532981

How? It's a french expression designating a french military troop management concept your military leaders decided to c/c after WWI.

If you changed the meaning it's literally that you're doing something wrong.

BTW the actual English word for entrepreneur is enterpriser (which obviously came from old french but back when England had like half of France).

Some faggot decided it sounded cooler in french and now you monkeys believe you invented something.

>Things wrong with the Marine Corps

They fight hard, not smart.

>>533059

oh my friend , if thats news to you youre in for a world of surprises

trust me you burgers have it good compared to us hues

our last presdent let your nigger spy on us and the hardware is still there so ola to the agents seeing this

>>532942

While this is true, I think 250k is a bit of an exaggeration.

>>533114

>WE'RE ASSAULTING

That's way cooler though, isn't that why you join the marines in the first place?

>>533114

who is this guy?

1: Espirit de corps is what differentiates us from the rest of the branches. We don't really do things that much differently from anyone else (Subtle differences aside). Marines are better than most because of attitude.

2. They're gay, they should be done less often, but they do have a purpose. Same reason you spend half of fucking bootcamp on the drill deck.

3. They're also pretty fucking gay. The only ones worth anything are the specific rank-related ones for promotion. I filled my education points for Cpl by finding a bunch of tests about the wiring of trucks that didn't have a test.

4. They're gay, but that's because leadership makes them gay. They work if done right, problem is, the Marine Corps doesn't know how to do them right

5. Never had an issue with these, in receiving or assigning them. Your NCO's must have sucked.

6. Seemed to go well in my unit. Again, yours probably just sucked.

7. Huge problem

8. Again, huge problem. Nothing worse than standing at POA during a promotion that should take 5 minutes, but First Sgt can't fucking read

9. Absolutely

10. The fuck is wrong with reading? It isn't mandatory, it just gets you free points towards promotion.

11. "Hurr current year". We're a fighting force. The most masculine (Read: homoerotic) fighting force in the country. Women don't belong, they contribute nothing and are a net negative.

12. See above. Something tells me you were a faggot fucking POG that took advantage of point 9

13. That's the way the entire world works, not just the Corps, and it's always been that way.

14. Pretty gay, sure. It's more a PR thing than a sadism and faggorty thing. The US doesn't need the Marine Corps, it wants one. We've been on the chopping block multiple times, and only still exist because the public voted that way.

15. Clearly you never worked with the Army. They can't believe the autonomy even the most junior of Marines gets. It's annoying, but it's way better than the alternative.

16. Truth

17. Yeh

18. yeh again.

19. You signed the motherfucking contract. Gay, but you also voluntarily signed a piece of paper that permitted the government to no shit execute you.

20. Yup

21. This is extremely common. Huge problem. There are cooks and hardquarters Marines with CARs that never went condition 3 on a deployment.

22. Sure, but didn't you just complain that the Corps says "You're a grown man" and then doesn't treat us like it?

23. Sure.

For the most part pretty alright, but it just sounds like you're a POG bitch that's butthurt that he doesn't get to slay dragons, and decided to vent on /k/ about it, as if they can fix it.

>>533124

Terrence Popp: an army veteran who has a Youtube channel. I tried to edit it to exclude the eceleb bullshit a lot of MRA stuff if you care and just show the germane part of his argument, since he is apparently a combat veteran (Grenada and both Iraq wars with the Army Rangers, maybe Green Beret later I think). It struck me as an interesting critique of the Marines since he's basically agreeing with the gung-ho stereotype they themselves promote and arguing that it leads to flawed doctrine. I was curious to see if anyone here could offer arguments or experience for or against his position.

>>533122

He's the commander in chief, all member's of the armed forces are under his command. however Congress holds the power to declare war; furthermore Congress controls the purse, meaning they set the size of the military and it's pay.

>>533129

Thanks, ill look him up. On face value however i disagree, i think even if the organization were not referred to as marines it would be necessary to have some form of high-risk assault infantry operating on a multi-divisional level in order to facilitate a more reactive frontline in conventional warfare. Certainly armour and other forms of fire support are the big killers but i think that often, not necessarily in regards to iraq or afghanistan, it will be necessary to use infantry as a primary offensive force to prevent the loss of combat initiative as the situation may demand. adding to that situations such as naval landings or assaults on positions accessible only to infantry, i think an assault focused morale centric element is needed.

I'll be looking him up though. im not sure he's inherently wrong, just that he is advocating for a very different doctrine for the use of infantry and the value of individual life to the US armed forces.

>>533122

>they cleaned out the CIA recently

Nigger what? Are you talking about the vtols landing not snackbaring in Langley and dropping of armed dudes. was that some alex jones shit or real?

>>533157

>dropping of armed dudes

dropping off armed dudes

>>533212

They have enough rapes as it is.

>>533250

>Russia won't allow them in

What? Russia has tons of women in the military, always sort of did in soviet times (it's a leftist thing, remember).

They're just not being retarded about it and don't allow them in units were physical strength/endurance is necessary for the job.

And also Russian women are actual women… meaning they don't want to play pretend GI Janes, they want to wear nice clothes and have a rich husband.

>>532821

I got a fun one for you: Embassy Duty in 3rd world shit holes doesn't receive hazard pay even when in hostile countries.

>>533129

>>533114

There is one major misconception with "shock troops". The difference stems from the difference between the original marines and airborne (British, French, US or otherwise) usage and the modern one.

Originally those forces were meant to have a culture of very aggressive, high morale infantry based assault tactics, that may be costly in lives but by taking advantage of confusion and psychological pressure, a well trained unit should be able to accomplish a, reasonable, objective even if relatively alone (Colonel Ardant Du Picq doctrine).

Said shock infantry were meant to be used on their own, with very little support if at all, because of the nature of the battlefields they would be engaged.

Airborne were meant to land on areas with a surprised enemy actively moving to counter (and commandos were meant to jump ON TOP of enemy critical points. LO-LO jump like the french 11th shock regiment did in Egypt in 1956. Planes flying at less than 500 feet high, DZ of 850 yards per 230, 30 people out in 14 seconds per two doors, 20 seconds jump. All of it in full view of enemy machine gun nests, they took some loses but in the resulting confusion they killed way more because well they knew what they were doing while the surprise was total), marines were meant to do the same from the sea when not assaulting fortified beaches (or originally to raid/take over places with basically themselves, armed sailors and support from the ships guns).

You can't wait for tanks because you either don't have any to begin with or by the time you get there the enemy will have kicked you out.

It's not a mistake for the marines to act the way they act. It's a mistake to engage them somewhere regular mechanized warfare can be done by the "normal" Army.

And that's the actual problem in modern warfare. We keep using units for what they aren't made for, mainly because those prestigious "fighting" units would GET BORED, and bitch to no end (because they sign up to fight, remember), if a war is done without them (and all those officers from quasi noble houses would have less shinies than their army counterpart… AN OFFENSE THAT WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED).

Even though they aren't needed because there is no need of their specific expertise (that's exactly what happened in the french army when the army initially only deployed mountain regiments and infantry regiments in Afghanistan… Because to patrol and man FOBs you don't need anything else than basic infantry) they will still be engaged into those theaters.

>>533320

>i just dont know how to manage the large army of a large democracy

You don't, democracies are inherently suicidal due to their ineffectiveness.

>>533322

>democracy is fucked

True, but if i were the president i would annex canada, mexico, cuba, greenland, all atlantic islands west of barbados and internalize the entire US economy just short of a few resource imports from african "partner" states. So i dont feel it's fair for me to lay too much judgement.

Also, im enjoying the significant integers.

>>533314

>Do you mean the kind of people who go on about how every generation of their family served in some kind of a war

The way military brass works is essentially by using prestige and perceived achievements as a currency to climb up the ranks.

A military family gives you a few extra starting points (I said quasi-nobles for the US, but in France and UK a lot of the brass is from actual noble houses even in 2017) and since it's a really good social position to be at there is no reason to not want it…

Also you have more prestigious postings and units (in this day and age the infantry, the fightiest the better. For most of WWII and the Cold War it was the chairforce. Before that it was the Navy) that will determine decades of careers, because promising (IE with extra points) junior officers are put in those prestigious posting out of officer school to be groomed to go higher, to much higher.

So if you 3S, 4S general, don't give them combat postings (the occasions to rack up achievement points really) you're making a lot of people angry, either older guys with lots of stars or the people signing the paychecks…

So even if the units don't really fit your operational need you need to send them to have your """best and brightest""" young officer rack points.

To give you an idea, there was no US chief of staff from 1942 to 2001 that came from the USMC. There has been 2 since 9/11 (out of 5 2/1/1/1, the army one, gen. Dempsey lead the ops in Falluhjah).

>>533335

>Navy

Sorry before the planes it was cavalry that was the most prestigious, not the Navy (except in the UK maybe).

>>533337

It depends what part of history you look at but, generally, it's been a bit of a fight over the years between Cavalry families and Naval families.

Originally the royal navy was 99% pirates, with the prestige growing slowly compared to cavalry as the empire became more and more naval.

>>532821

>armorers and armory in general

Yeah the shit sucks, but what sucks more is the constant whining of bitches every rifle range. "I shouldn't have to clean my weapons, it rained on me" every fucking week. Never mind getting an earful from dudes complaining that people not properly disposing of Q-Tips are in fact murdering Ferngully as we speak. You thought group punishment was bad because of a guy in your unit? Imagine going through trash bags because some random dickhead from a different fucking regiment just happened to be spotted tossing a Q-Tip into the trash. As for the BCP shit, true for the most part, but we also work stupid long hours and usually stuck doing a lot more waiting than hurrying up. Mind you I was working with a battalion of POGs so it was almost a constant rifle range or inspecting weapons that probably wouldn't even be used for anything that year.

May as well add something to your list

>the stupid fucks who don't know how to use household objects in the barracks

For the love of God, use your phone to look up how a washing machine and dryer works, please! There is no reason a bunch of 18-23 year Olds shouldn't know how to use a washer or st least have the decency to ask. Having half of the washers and dryers for three floors worth of Marines be rendered useless because people don't know how to just run loads either through the week or day should not be a common occurrence, high cycling rate of enlistment and separation notwithstanding.

>>533207

>Foreign Legions

Also this. France has a foreign legion, Russia has a foreign legion, America lets Mexicans and fucking leafs serve, so why not just establish a foreign legion at this point to let faggots from third world countries foreign nations have a means to enter the country and acquire citizenship if they're hard workers but too stupid to operate a liquor store/gas station for that there business-based green card?

>>533375

Is this a joke?

>>533387

>this way you don't have to worry too much about the logistics of them getting killed, run it more or less like the French do

The french support the Legion alot, the fuck are you talking about.

The legion has a lighter footprint because they're "Commandos" not because they're supposed to just die.

They're a decently trained shock troop close to division sized force.

>>533387

>>533390

Another thing, the SEALs are pretty shit at fighting another force, they're only really good at breaking shit and getting out really fast with either shock and awe or sneaking away like they were never there.

They are full operator but none of the infantry which is why they get their shit pushed in if they're found.

>>533394

>historically been used specifically as shock troops and civil defense troops on missions where it's expected that 40-80% of them will end up dead.

They have one of the lowest attrition rates in armed forces history even if you include the battles they lost every man.

>I'm pretty sure the French Foreign Legion doesn't need about $50,000 to train and gear up every individual infantryman before even paying them.

They do, they also test out most of the new shit the French military wants to field before everyone else. Do you think they're just some kind of shitty penal force? They're trained to fight in every type of terrain and are quite well taken care of. There are only a few things that vary in terms of a regular french soldier. The pay is much less, It is much more strict, It accounts for those who don't learn french, They are rather highly trained (to the point that a jungle obstacle course takes a platoon 45 minutes to clear, while the USMC takes a few hours).

> think I stated above, modern warfare has very little to do with large-scale battles

I'm not even talking about large-scale battles, I'm talking about basic shit.

They can't even take an airfield like a platoon of Rangers can.

The Green Berets can defend themselves in worse case scenarios because they have basic infantry tactics to fall back on, SEALs don't have this because they never learn basic infantry tactics, just Operator shit.

>>533114

From the point of view of a civvie, yes.

>>533394

I think the military gets its use when the US inevitably crumbles under the massive debt borrowing we've built ourselves upon. The reason the US was so salty about AIIB was that it traded in RMB and not US dollars, thus cutting the US of from playing middle man.

>>533395 I feel retarded for asking this, but doesn't basic infantry qualification count as part of being a seal? Don't you have to pass basic infantry to even qualify for the eval? Or do they not work on it so much they forget that shit?

number 1 on the list should be generation kill.

>>533409

They never learn it, It's mostly just small unit tactics.

>The land warfare phase teaches the class basic weapons, demolitions, land navigation, patrolling, rappelling, marksmanship and small-unit tactics

There's no infantry basic course so they can never fall back on it when they're in the shitter.

I'm not saying SEALs are shit, they're pretty good for espionage and security of marines and marksmanship, but up against a group that knows how to fight? If caught they're dead in the water.

They should do something similar to what the SBS do and put them through Marine Basic, that way they will have infantry tactics to fall back on.

>>533387

>Airforce has paratroopers/para-rescuers

>Army has Special Ops/Rangers

If you just mean increasing the frequency of use and size of those organizations vs others, then ok.

I thought you were saying Seals alone can do the job of the Marine Corps.

>SEALs has the highest dropout rates because of how grueling the actual training is, but because of that they clearly have an edge over any Marine training.

Are you talking about hell week or something similar? In that sense Seal "training" difficulty isn't there to teach you anything, it's just a test of willpower instead of training in the conventional sense as in something your muscle memory can draw on when your brain shuts off in combat. It's more like six months of continual hazing and fraternity challenges, the people who leave aren't dropping out because they're incompetent, they're dropping out because they don't see the point. Only the (physically fit and capable) people who don't need to see the point of whatever they're doing are preserved in Seal organization, that's the whole point.

Do Seals even have parachute training? Or training to run tanks or other weapons?

>>533435

>Do Seals even have parachute training?

They do (Even have their own parachute school), that's one of their main training courses.

>>533436

Well at least that's something.

>>533394

>As they should, but "support" doesn't translate to massive funding. Last I checked they get less funding than the rest of the French military, and I know for a fact they "borrow" vehicles from the rest of the French military when they need to use them, they don't own their own vehicles. If I remember right, the average Frenchie in the army makes almost $65,000/year on average vs. French Foreign Legion is something like $20,000/year according to google with $60,000/year being the average for hazard pay. Also keep in mind that no military is as well-funded as the US military, and I'm pretty sure the French Foreign Legion doesn't need about $50,000 to train and gear up every individual infantryman before even paying them. With how popular the US is for foreigners to move to, you could gear up a foreign legion with cheaper equipment than the regular armed forces (who's gear alone retails at about $5,000 each), force them to share other armed forces vehicles, send them on suicide missions, have shittier pay, have cheaper training, and still have more applicants than you would know what to do with. You don't need thousands of $350,000 officers to run a branch who's focus would be infantry.

Jesus christ were the fuck did you heard that???

The Foreign Legion IS NOT separated from the french military (and has not been since after Napoleon III IIRC), foreign regiments are integrated in regular army brigades.

Foreign Legion regiments are REGULAR regiments following the same exact rules as the rest of the french army, save for their specific internal discipline rules and specific recruitment/basic training/traditions (which are all largely regiment-based anyway. You need to have an old army to understand that in the french military you don't have soldier and marines. You have soldiers, legionnaires, tirailleurs, spahi, cuirassiers, dragons, marsouins, hussards, bigors, chasseurs, rapaces, tringlos, etc… with each their own internal discipline, traditions, history and decorated battle standards for specific actions).

They're geared and payed exactly the same way as the rest of the french military (which is not much of both, pay for the enlisted in France is around 14400€/year BEFORE INCOME TAX, you need to be senior (two or three contracts) and above sergeant to start making a decent income. No-one, not even a 2S general commanding troops in the field is racking 350 000€ per year. Only engineers/directors in the DGA (french DARPA) maybe makes that kind of dosh (so they don't go into the private sector).

>>534696

Could you tell us how the ranks of the French generals work, and how they translate to actually commanding units or sitting in offices? According to wikipedia there are only two actual ranks and the rest are just there for tradition.

I actually like the French system of just putting the name of the unit and the word general together to form the rank. We basically inherited the translation of the Germanic system, and so the names of most ranks make no sense in a modern context. E.g. a one star general is called dandártábornok, which is just the words for brigade and general put together. So just like brigadier general in English. But a two star general is called vezérőrnagy, and that literally translates to leader (or leading) major. Not to mention that őrnagy itself is from őr (guard or watch) and nagy (great or big) put together, as it was the rank of the man in command of the camp's watch. At least the English equivalent of major general has the word general in it.

>>534700

>According to wikipedia there are only two actual ranks and the rest are just there for tradition.

No, no, no there are four ranks (five even) it's just that only general de brigade (2S) and general de division (3S) are ranks within their own rights: you get the promotion, then you get a posting like usual. General de corps d'armée (4S) and General d'armée (5S) are posting dependent you can only get "promoted" to that because as a 3S you get a 4S post (you don't lose stars once you have them of course) . While Maréchal is a distinction (honor rank, like chief ranks for the NCOs).

>>534700

>French generals work, and how they translate to actually commanding units or sitting in offices?

A lot of them are desk jokeys, but the ones in the army leading a brigade size element in combat operation (a 2S) lead from the front. It's a general rule of the french military, desk riding is fine if it's your job, but if your job is to be a leader of men, you have to lead the men, french officers even as high as colonels are fully expected to lead combat operations and physically be at critical places (to micromanage if need be) and 2S is the last of the "field" ranks which means making the rounds of companies HQ, inspecting combat posts on the contact lines, etc… And not sitting around in Paris or in bunker 200km from where the fighting is.

A 3S would maybe do it if we were engaging actual division size fighting elements but they would typically just stay in their HQ planning while the 2S have to do the leading thing.

Again it would vary depending circumstances (and personalities) but that's roughly the "ideal" vision of it.

Also technically French Generals never retire even if they are de facto retired (which is why you often hear shit like "there are a lot of generals in France" which isn't really true).

>>533308

Or maybe because Russians are just incompetant when it comes to actual military strategy and only win most of the time by literally throwing themselves at the enemy.

>>534708

>General de corps d'armée (4S) and General d'armée (5S) are posting dependent you can only get "promoted" to that because as a 3S you get a 4S post

I see. So 3S only gets promoted to 4S for a 4S position, but it keeps the star even if it goes back to a 3S position. But do 2S get promoted to 3S without getting into a 3S position?

>A 3S would maybe do it if we were engaging actual division size fighting elements but they would typically just stay in their HQ planning while the 2S have to do the leading thing.

So, could we say that 3S is the "designated desk jockey position", and 4S and 5S in theory should work like a 2S, just with a bigger unit under their command?

>"there are a lot of generals in France" which isn't really true

Are they actually understaffed, or just about the right size?

Honestly, it's surprising how the French military seems to be so sensible despite centuries of traditions. Is 2S the lowest rank because of those traditions, or is it because of NATO requirements?

>>534718

>But do 2S get promoted to 3S without getting into a 3S position?

I think it's possible in theory (I'm not 100% sure, I would have look the regulation for it and I can't be bothered), but in practice no.

I think in theory you can be promoted to any rank any way.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining this properly but 4S and above are ranks that are not ranks, but titles.

>>534718

>3S is the "designated desk jockey position", and 4S and 5S in theory should work like a 2S, just with a bigger unit under their command?

No, it's just that 3S and above you just have too many troops under you to micromanage them. They might do it for morale or inspect specific points they are worried about but the french army has been brigadized, so the highest "leader of men" is the commander of a brigade, so it's his job. A 3S job is to worry about how the brigades are moving (both his and the enemy).

In this day and age a 3S in a combat operation will have an interarm command, with one or two army brigades, an air component, possibly a navy component.

It's a completely different job than "just more people".

>>534718

>Are they actually understaffed, or just about the right size?

It's a bit bloated, but not too bad compared to the NATO average. There are lots of military schools (which for historic reasons can't be headed by a colonel or God forbid, a civilian), lots of DGA positions, lot's of phantom command position (we had avoided that for years but now that we're back in NATO command + the fucking new EU command it's a fuckfest), lots of defense advisers (for actual diplomatic missions) which end up making a lot of stars compared to the actual units in the french army.

But it's a minor issue because it's hard to tell how many of those would be not-retired (since they don't retire unless really invalid) and payed essentially the same (except for not doing anything, so…)

>Honestly, it's surprising how the French military seems to be so sensible despite centuries of traditions. Is 2S the lowest rank because of those traditions, or is it because of NATO requirements?

Brigadier is a french term, it's the rank above colonel.

Brigadier were one star on colonel insignias, you had basically three ranks of colonel, lieutenant-colonel, colonel, brigadier. A brigadier would be an experienced colonel in command of more than one regiment but not a proper brigade and not a general, he could be for example the leader of men when the general de brigade (2S) would concentrate on logistics and planning or he could lead a half-brigade (which is a thing). It was fairly rare (colonial thing/ad-hoc commands, mostly) to begin with and it was confusing because two ranks of brigadiers existed (one being what they call corporals in the cavalry) so it was axed after WWII, probably to have same numbers of generals ranks as the UK/US.

Géneralissime is 6 stars. Maréchal is 7.

>>534718

>so sensible

It's not. General and Colonels should not lead from the front unless absolutely necessary. It sounds cool on paper but the amount of time French superior officers got killed because they were in the middle of battle instead of supervising the battle is stupid. And without superior officer the battle tend to be lost.

Second it creates "a chief culture" in which basically every word of a general is law… even if he's being fucking retarded and his entire staff knows it, ratting him out to his superior is the worst offense any officer could do. Countless battle have been lost because of that.

It's a more "honorable" way to manage an army, but ultimately it's a coin toss.

>>533157

Stop trying so hard to discredit Alex Jones, he's right 90% of the time and he's absolutely wrecking libshits and globalists and fake news for good jews

you're glowing in the dark here, CIA shill

>>534765

>4S and above are ranks that are not ranks, but titles

So they don't outrank 3S and don't get paid more? Or what does it mean in practice?

>No, it's just that 3S and above you just have too many troops under you to micromanage them.

We have a misunderstanding here, by what you call a desk jockey I've meant the kind of generals who, instead of looking over maps and decide troop movement are such, manage various programs for the military that can't be handled by civil servants. As far as I understand 4S and up shouldn't concentrate on that, because they have to do the work required by their actual position. Or is it more complicated than that?

>It's not.

Well, compared to what could be it still seems to be sensible. Imagine if e.g. all cavalry regiments still had enough horses to mount all troops for a parade. Although I do agree that the kind of romanticism and rigidity you describe is quite dangerous, but romanticism and rigidity are inherent in all armed forces.

>>535071

>Or is it more complicated than that?

There are three type of officers. Junior officers, senior officers, general officers.

Junior officers (Sous-Lieutenant, Lieutenant capitaine) direct the fighting, senior officers (Commandant, Lt Colonel, Colonel) direct the battles, junior generals (brigade, division, corps d'armée) direct operations, senior generals (armée, géneralissime, maréchal) direct wars.

Once you're a general your job is making plans and sit at a desk, doesn't matter if you're in the arms industry supervising whatever, or in the army proper. Your not supposed to be directing troops (save inspecting or morale reasons), you have senior officers for that.

Now because the brigadier rank was removed and because a brigade is small enough to do both jobs, the 2S is now the last "field rank" so to speak.

>So they don't outrank 3S and don't get paid more?

Yes of course.

>Or what does it mean in practice?

In practice it's just like a rank, but it's not it's a title. As in a real title as in "a nobility title" (requires a law or at least specific procedure from the government to name one, not the army), not just the appellation of a job.

In the french (land) army you have four types of """ranks""", you have ranks, distinctions, dignities and titles.

>>532820

>11) The prevalent sexism. “Hurr durr, she sucked dick to get promoted.” C’mon. It’s the 21st century. Grow up.

Stopped reading right there