-
Council Member
I can and do applaud -- have applauded -- the intent
but I disagreed vehemently with that 'warrior' bit at the time (and with the "Wounded Warrior," which IMO is even worse)...
They didn't hear me; probably wouldn't have listened if they'd been able to; and won't pay any attention now. I know that. Still think it was a bad choice, it's a dumb word to apply to Soldiers, etc.
How's that getting the CSS types to be interested in if not reveling in combat working out?
I acknowledge that many improvements have been made in our training in the last five years. I also believe many more are needed -- not least dumping that dumb Task, Condition and Standards lowest common denominator approach...
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks