Charlie -

Nichols accurately describes what I mean. If I may add, "warriors" cannot turn off being a warrior, by and large. If they could, they wouldn't "be" warriors, they would be acting like one. And a warrior in a garrison environment is very similar to a tiger in a cage. Just pacing and pacing, thinking about eating the little kids with the balloons.

As far as "the Army is no place for warriors" being a blanket statement, I've met as many, if not more "accountants at heart" in the combat organizations I've been a part of, as in CS and CSS units. Certain organizations are better homes for warriors than others, but the Army is a large bureaucratic organization, and large bureacratic organizations are antithetical to "warriors."

The bottom line is we really don't want an Army of warriors. First, I suggest they are rarer than one might think. Second, they tend to fight, whether you want them to or not. Soldiers, with discipline and a fundamental understanding of mission are much more useful, especially in the "Small Wars" venue.

The internet is a very bad place for your typical "warrior". They tend to wander from place to place, picking fights, sometimes without even knowing it.

BTW - I am Army, but I think the Marine Corps rocks. If they were less picky about back injuries, I woulda been one!