William S. Lind :collection (merged thread)

[wm]

I am reminded of that piece of doggerel about the devil quoting scripture for his own purposes.

It is not my 'soldier'. It is in fact your - a US - soldier.
I hate to find it necessary to refer you to your own - US - manual FM 1 where contained in Army Values is the Soldier's Creed which starts with:

What do you make of the very first sentences of the Foreword of the 2005 version of FM-1? ( I presume that is the version from which you were drawing your quotation.)

The Army is the primary landpower arm of our Nation’s Armed Forces. It exists to serve the American people, protect enduring national interests, and fulfill the Nation’s military responsibilities. (emphasis added)

And from Chapter 1

1-1. First and foremost, the Army is Soldiers. No matter how much the tools of warfare improve, it is Soldiers who use them to accomplish their mission. Soldiers committed to selfless service to the Nation are the centerpiece of Army organizations. Everything the Army does for the Nation is done by Soldiers supported by Army civilians and family members. Only with quality Soldiers answering the noble call to serve freedom can the Army ensure the victories required on battlefields of today and the future.

1-2. The Army, a long-trusted institution, exists to serve the Nation. As part of the joint force, the Army supports and defends America’s Constitution and way of life against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
. . .

1-8. Army forces are versatile. In addition to conducting combat operations, Army forces help provide security. They supply many services associated with establishing order, rebuilding infrastructure, and delivering humanitarian support. When necessary, they can direct assistance in reestablishing governmental institutions. Army forces help set the conditions that allow a return to normalcy or a self-sustaining peace.

The section from paragraph 1.62 that you selected and reported out of context uses the term "warrior" as a set up for introducing the warrior ethos. This discussion of the warrior ethos continues in paragraph 1-63 as follows

1.63. The Warrior Ethos describes the frame of mind of the professional Soldier. It proclaims the selfless commitment to the Nation, mission, unit, and fellow Soldiers that all Soldiers espouse.

With regard to your other quotation, paragraph 1-40, the paragraphs that follow it in the Section entitled THE AMERICAN PROFESSION OF ARMS are much more instructive regarding the uniqueness claim with which paragraph 1-40 concludes. Additionally, I consider paragraph 1-46 as supporting my assertion that your/British system of selection/training of leaders is not for the US Army (I suspect your mileage will vary):

1-46. A final aspect that distinguishes the American profession of arms is the professionalism of its officers and noncommissioned officers. Both are given considerable authority early in their careers. Both are expected to exercise initiative to identify and resolve unforeseen circumstances. Both are developed through a series of schools that equips them for greater responsibilities as they are promoted. This combination of professional development and experience in making decisions within general guidelines rather than rigid rules develops flexible and self-aware leaders. It has resulted in an agile institution able to conduct decentralized operations and obtain extraordinary results.

As an aside, you might note that in my original post your response to which I quoted above, I put both the words 'soldier' and 'warrior' in double quotation marks (or scare quotes) while just above I put them in single quotations. Both of these uses of punctuation are part of a convention. The use of scare quotes is to alert the reader that the word so marked is being used with non-standard definitions (the scare quote convention is also used in speech when people use their fingers to make quotation marks in the air as they speak, usually a little emphatically, the word or phrase being used in a non-standard way; oftentimes this speech habit is accompanied with a derisive tone, ) , while the use of single quotation marks indicate that the word is being mentioned (or named) rather than used as part of the sentence.