KT's Military Credentials And The VS Debate

[Cpl Kendall]

But, she did say that the social interaction part in the military came to her in part from the people she was around when she was growing up. Haven't you ever heard two old soldiers talk after they got together? They're discussions that at times seem to have no end. And that's from just being a listener that's outside the conversation.

They talk but if a person is there that hasn't experianced what they have, they talk about things that are funny, minor or not-traumatic. We don't include people who are not part of the actual "club" that we belong to. For example I have PTSD, that makes me part of a group of soldiers with certain experiances and memories. We do not talk about or include others in this discussion that do not have it. Even my wife has no idea of the specific events that I experianced, only the effect it had on me and the actual clinical details of the illness.

The combat "club" is even more exclusive but I'll quote CmdrWilkens who says it better than me:


A unit never REALLY discloses what it is like to outsiders. Sure even now I can talk a bit about what my tours in Iraq were like. I might even open up and tlak about the absolute pile of crap I felt like after knowing one of the guys in my company blew himself away or how I felt after three guys were turned into confetti by a raodside bomb with steel pellets that literally shreded their bodies like cheese. I can tell people that but tis still just a front or a facade. There is nobody who I really talk to or connect with and actually SHARE what the experience of a combat zone is like except for those people who were there or whom I have admitted through shared expereince into the limited fraternity of people who have seen the shit. Even within that exclusive community i am an outsider within the smaller community of "I had to shoot people" and "I felt the pulse die in my buddies neck." People who have been there and done that do not share willingly or easily with those who have not. For all that Traviss claims a comraderie with the military it is through here defence correspondence work. Without evidence to the contrary I can't help but point out that the average soldier at the company level does not talk to defense correspondent. The people who converse with the media have lots of shiny brass and are, despite occasionally being decent, much further removed from the circle of the been there done that. I don't mind her claiming military experience because she does have some. What I do take umbrage with is her claims of extra authenticity based on that experience. She is claiming memership or, at the least, affinity with the been there done that club and I for one cannot see her membership being accepted.

I'm not that familiar with the inner workings of the british navy. Several year ago, I had a cousin to be the first one of our family to join the US navy. All the other military people in my family chose the marines, air force or army. But, from what I do know of the US Navy, there is physical and weapons training in basic. There are obvious differences in certain aspects of training, if you're gonna be on a ship or driving a tank, but there are many similarities. There has even been cross training between US navy and army people, so that some of the navy can act as relief for the army people in Iraq.

Of course there is physical and weapons training in Basic for all trades and branchs. What you fail to understand is that beyond that (what you get is the bare minimum) you get the actual relevant weapons and tactics at your trade course. For an infantryman this will be intense, for a clerk it's "lets go to the range".

And the Naval personnel in Iraq is a system where they are taking personnel in non-critical trades and using them as convoy drivers. They get relevant training before they go. They don't have it to start.

It doesn't matter what her father was, since she had access to many other family members and nonfamily people that she could ask. When I was growing up, I'd ask my father specifics about planes and vehicles and weapons and he'd tell me about them. He'd get me pictures of carriers and fighters and such at the nex.

And how is her family (apperently Navy men) relating this going to help her writing?

And she has said that the social interaction information she got was largely from where she grew up and who she grew up around.

What I was pointing out is that living on base will not automatically give you insight into the military. In fact a great deal of military parents try to shield their kids from the military as much as they can.

[Cpl Kendall]

I don't believe she's intentionally concealed what she did so much as not thought it particularly important. She tried out two different services and found, after a few years, that she wasn't particularly good with either one, and then moved to being a journalist talking about defense folks. Which she feels is a much more important part of her background, along with having social connections to all these military types.

As far as whether or not she actually asks these experts, I would be amazed if she didn't at least ask for some input from them. Most good authors make full use of friends and family.

I will say that, for the purposes of what is commonly argued about (the Grand Army TO&E) it is actually best for her to have been an HQ clerk as far as establishing expertise goes. At the low level that she worked at, that would give her the most background with logistics, I do believe. I don't think there's much in the VS debate which is concerned with the plausibility of combat scenes in Traviss's novels.

A clerk is a glorified secretary. Add to that she was apperently used as a PR "specialist". That confers no experiance with logistics, even a clerk in a logistics unit would only absorb the piddly fetails as they are busy working on pay problems. The trade your looking for is "supply tech" at least the UK equivilant.

[GStone]

We don't include people who are not part of the actual "club" that we belong to.

Not the people I grew up around.

What you fail to understand is that beyond that (what you get is the bare minimum) you get the actual relevant weapons and tactics at your trade course.

No, I already said that there were differences. You need to reread what I said.

And the Naval personnel in Iraq is a system where they are taking personnel in non-critical trades and using them as convoy drivers. They get relevant training before they go. They don't have it to start.

I didn't say they did.

And how is her family (apperently Navy men) relating this going to help her writing?

It's often the same thing with certain details altered: performing an underwater demolition in enemy territory, as opposed to sharpshooting. Wearing camo paint and a camo net or an air tank, flippers and an explosive. Comradery and sense of protecting friends is the same. You don't even need to be in the military for that.

What I was pointing out is that living on base will not automatically give you insight into the military. In fact a great deal of military parents try to shield their kids from the military as much as they can.

Mine didn't. I had regular visits to where my father was stationed. The military was a big part of my life growing up. I just never officially joined up when I got older.

[Cpl Kendall]

Not the people I grew up around.

Oh of course, your family and friends favored you with a few stories and you assume that it's how Traviss family was. Frankly I doubt that you got anything grisely.

No, I already said that there were differences. You need to reread what I said.

Someone hand me a shovel.

I didn't say they did.

Then it was a red-herring.

It's often the same thing with certain details altered: performing an underwater demolition in enemy territory, as opposed to sharpshooting. Wearing camo paint and a camo net or an air tank, flippers and an explosive. Comradery and sense of protecting friends is the same. You don't even need to be in the military for that.

Your apperently not paying attention, what is also apperent is that you don't know what your talking about. Your BS is so deep that I'm going to neep a scuba suit to get through it.

Mine didn't. I had regular visits to where my father was stationed. The military was a big part of my life growing up. I just never officially joined up when I got older.

Yeah and? So you got to visit the base, so did my wife and kids. Does that translate into giving actual details on what's going on in the unit, no.

[GStone]

Oh of course, your family and friends favored you with a few stories and you assume that it's how Traviss family was. Frankly I doubt that you got anything grisely.

All I have to do is show the possibility exists. I've done that. You have no evidence that she wasn't told of such things. You don't know one way or the other. However, I have shown that the stance you are taking isn't the standard for all who serve.

I didn't say they did.

Then it was a red-herring.

No, this is you claiming I meant something when it was clear that I didn't and me standing by what I already said. And it's you following this situation up with attempting to distract things by accusing me of a fallacy to hide the fact you are trying to do this.

Your apperently not paying attention, what is also apperent is that you don't know what your talking about. Your BS is so deep that I'm going to neep a scuba suit to get through it.

Then, you need to demonstrate that the idea of comradery and friendship and wanting to protect the people you are close to can only...and I do mean only...only come from having been a soldier on the front lines. That there is not a single other thing that could ever produce those kinds of feelings.

Yeah and? So you got to visit the base, so did my wife and kids. Does that translate into giving actual details on what's going on in the unit, no.

So, you ignore what I say and its context and substitute your own. I know you claimed to still participate here to be a troll, but you're just making a mockery of yourself with this behavior.

[Cpl Kendall]

All I have to do is show the possibility exists. I've done that. You have no evidence that she wasn't told of such things. You don't know one way or the other. However, I have shown that the stance you are taking isn't the standard for all who serve.

It doesn't have to be the standard of all who serve, just for the majority.

No, this is you claiming I meant something when it was clear that I didn't and me standing by what I already said. And it's you following this situation up with attempting to distract things by accusing me of a fallacy to hide the fact you are trying to do this.

Hand me a shovel.

Then, you need to demonstrate that the idea of comradery and friendship and wanting to protect the people you are close to can only...and I do mean only...only come from having been a soldier on the front lines. That there is not a single other thing that could ever produce those kinds of feelings.

No I don't, what I have to show and have shown is that a soldier experiances a different level of this.

So, you ignore what I say and its context and substitute your own. I know you claimed to still participate here to be a troll, but you're just making a mockery of yourself with this behavior.

And? If you have nothing relevant to add to this debate than I suggest you bugger of and work on your Jack Buaer skills.

[GStone]

It doesn't have to be the standard of all who serve, just for the majority.

Except, you wish to claim a specific situation without evidence. It's a stance that looses automatically because it is baseless.

Hand me a shovel.

You already have your shovel. It's called your cursor.

No I don't, what I have to show and have shown is that a soldier experiances a different level of this.

That's where you're wrong. What's needed is the emotion to be expressed. There is only so far you can describe the actions of characters in words, as well as there being only so many ways you can describe an emotion from the perspective of having had a particular emotion. After that, it just becomes"

'Yeah, well I felt it more than you'
'I felt it more than how much you're saying right now you felt it'
'I felt it so bad, I'm in a coma right now'
'I felt it so bad, I died and have now come back as a ghost to tell you I died because it effected me so much'

It becomes its own caricature and turns into sloppy writting.

And? If you have nothing relevant to add to this debate than I suggest you bugger of and work on your Jack Buaer skills.

Then, you admit to being a troll. That this is no longer about Travis or the military or experience. You just want to flame and try to piss people off. That is not something you should do here.

[Cpl Kendall]

Except, you wish to claim a specific situation without evidence. It's a stance that looses automatically because it is baseless.

You don't need the specifics on her family life to make an evaluation based on available evidence. There is nothing indicating that she had an atypical military family. That's even if she was the child of a military parent.

No I don't, what I have to show and have shown is that a soldier experiances a different level of this.

That's where you're wrong. What's needed is the emotion to be expressed. There is only so far you can describe the actions of characters in words, as well as there being only so many ways you can describe an emotion from the perspective of having had a particular emotion. After that, it just becomes"

'Yeah, well I felt it more than you'
'I felt it more than how much you're saying right now you felt it'
'I felt it so bad, I'm in a coma right now'
'I felt it so bad, I died and have now come back as a ghost to tell you I died because it effected me so much'

It becomes its own caricature and turns into sloppy writting.

This doesn't even deserve a response.

Then, you admit to being a troll. That this is no longer about Travis or the military or experience. You just want to flame and try to piss people off. That is not something you should do here.

Repeating something doesn't make it true. In fact I've created the exact same thread on SDN. The fact that you can't handle this thread is not my problem.

[GStone]

You don't need the specifics on her family life to make an evaluation based on available evidence.

Yes...you do. I know you're just being a troll at the moment. But, I'll elaborate for those that might not figure it out on their own, unlike you have, which is why you're trolling.

Since it's being objected to that her experience in her life is not valid enough to warrant what she writes, you do need the specifics of her family life to make such an evaluation. You need this because it is a part of the life experiences that she is drawing upon when she writes, which she has openly admitted to.

At one point, you say 'what's her credentials?' Well, part of her credentials includes her family life. Now, you say it doesn't matter what her family life was like, meaning that after you have gotten what you wanted (evidence of what her credentials are), you have decided that they no longer matter now.

This is not unlikely behavior from someone that has openly stated he wishes to troll. If you would like more experience trolling, I'd recommend joining Troll Kingdom. There are plenty there with more experience.

There is nothing indicating that she had an atypical military family. That's even if she was the child of a military parent.

Because she lived in a naval port that was a garrison town at the same time, this would mean that she most likely is. This is also backed up by the fact that most of her family has been in the military.

This doesn't even deserve a response.

Your choice.

Repeating something doesn't make it true.

Given your obvious statement of a desire to troll, this would be required to know beforehand. But, while repeating something won't necessarily make something true, repeating something that was already true before one knew it means you're speaking the truth repeatedly.

In fact I've created the exact same thread on SDN. The fact that you can't handle this thread is not my problem.

I've been handling it perfectly. Unlike yourself, I have not needed to change my argument at all.

[Cpl Kendall]

Yes...you do. I know you're just being a troll at the moment. But, I'll elaborate for those that might not figure it out on their own, unlike you have, which is why you're trolling.

Since it's being objected to that her experience in her life is not valid enough to warrant what she writes, you do need the specifics of her family life to make such an evaluation. You need this because it is a part of the life experiences that she is drawing upon when she writes, which she has openly admitted to.

At one point, you say 'what's her credentials?' Well, part of her credentials includes her family life. Now, you say it doesn't matter what her family life was like, meaning that after you have gotten what you wanted (evidence of what her credentials are), you have decided that they no longer matter now.

This is not unlikely behavior from someone that has openly stated he wishes to troll. If you would like more experience trolling, I'd recommend joining Troll Kingdom. There are plenty there with more experience.

Yes because such a statement means that I must always be doing it.

Given your obvious statement of a desire to troll, this would be required to know beforehand. But, while repeating something won't necessarily make something true, repeating something that was already true before one knew it means you're speaking the truth repeatedly.

Yes because I must always be trolling.

I've been handling it perfectly. Unlike yourself, I have not needed to change my argument at all.

No, all you've done is argue from an entrenched position based on ignorance and maybes.

[Cpl Kendall]

Because she lived in a naval port that was a garrison town at the same time, this would mean that she most likely is. This is also backed up by the fact that most of her family has been in the military.

Assume away then. You do understand that the civvie population of a garrison town usually exceeds the amount of military and family members, right?

[Jedi Master Spock]

I will add that while for the most part, traumatized soldiers stay quiet about their experiences to outsiders, once in a while one is willing to unburden to people who have no military experience at all. I'm not going to say it's easy for them, or commonplace, although in some generations in some countries, the trauma of war was unfortunately nearly universal.

Some people do tell their wives everything; some people sit down with kids who might wind up fighting the next generation's war. Some few end up babbling uncontrollably during fits of panic and flashbacks to traumatic stress. Many feel too alienated.

It can be a very emotional topic, so I'd like to advise everybody to keep a cool head - and I'd like to focus on a question to Cpl Kendall (and a couple others in this thread), for a moment slightly away from Traviss's credentials:

What about Traviss's actual fiction bothers you?

[Lonestar]

I don't believe she's intentionally concealed what she did so much as not thought it particularly important.

Hmm... poor choice of words on my part. "Intentionally Omitted" would be better, even Drew Carey and Rob Riggle are forthright with what they did in the Marines, for example. The most detailed description that we have of her duties indicates that she was probably considered as dumb as a sack of hammers by the RNXS, and the whole "Media Specialist" thing may mean she was a office gopher in the PR department.

She tried out two different services and found, after a few years, that she wasn't particularly good with either one, and then moved to being a journalist talking about defense folks.

Just because she was a defense correspondent doesn't mean she knows/knew what the heck she was talking about, only that she got a job somewhere and was probably sent there based upon an editorial decision. I've cringed at more than a few so-called defense journalists comments on TV and in newspapers.

If I may relate a personal anecdote, a USN Photographer(They are called "Mass Communication Specialists" now, or something) came aboard my ship on deployment, and when he did the write up on navy.mil he got the name, rate(job description/rank), and what he was doing wrong! And this was a Chief, who spent many years in the Navy. So "Oh, well, she was a journalist" isn't a very good defense of her credibility. Especially when she doesn't have any researched published works like Thomas Ricks, Robert Kaplan, or Rick Atkinson.

Which she feels is a much more important part of her background, along with having social connections to all these military types.

She can feel all she wants, her depiction of the Force Structure of the GAR(and the bizarre Mand'o obsession) does nothing but confirm the impression that she was(is) a not-too-bright bottomfeeder.

As far as whether or not she actually asks these experts, I would be amazed if she didn't at least ask for some input from them. Most good authors make full use of friends and family.

(1) I don't think she's a very good author(yeah yeah, all subjective) and (2)Her reactions to her critics online are not(to me, at least) indicative of a person who seeks/takes advice well. ;)

I will say that, for the purposes of what is commonly argued about (the Grand Army TO&E) it is actually best for her to have been an HQ clerk as far as establishing expertise goes. At the low level that she worked at, that would give her the most background with logistics, I do believe.

A trained monkey could be a clerk. If she was a STAFF OFFICER, it would be a different situation(and I would be scratching my head more over her figures, instead of going "Oh, she was a retarded deck ape and worked in personnel")

I don't think there's much in the VS debate which is concerned with the plausibility of combat scenes in Traviss's novels.

I'm not qualified to comment on her depiction of small unit actions, and in any event I'm not sure if anyone is actually thrashing 'em. The primary complaint is the seeming lack of vision she has on "the big picture", with the argument that 3 million troopers is enough to prosecute the Clone Wars(most successful occupations require 1 to 50 soldier-to-civilian ratio). Tens of millions of men and women were mobilized for WW2 on Earth, and we're to believe that the primary ground force(and gun crews for starships, if Revenge of the Sith is anything to go by) for a galacticwide conflict is...3 million strong? That wouldn't be enough for one planet with Earth's population!

[Cpl Kendall]

I will add that while for the most part, traumatized soldiers stay quiet about their experiences to outsiders, once in a while one is willing to unburden to people who have no military experience at all. I'm not going to say it's easy for them, or commonplace, although in some generations in some countries, the trauma of war was unfortunately nearly universal.

For a typical Western soldier, there's not going to be alot of "sharing". You get the odd one who will actually discuss things in detail.

Some people do tell their wives everything; some people sit down with kids who might wind up fighting the next generation's war. Some few end up babbling uncontrollably during fits of panic and flashbacks to traumatic stress. Many feel too alienated.

The odd one does but the experiances that they see are often to horrific to tell their families. The common reasoning is that you don't want to "damage" them.

And I've had flashbacks and been witness to some and sometimes you get gibberish and other times you hear things that have no context, so your left wondering what the hell is going on.

It can be a very emotional topic, so I'd like to advise everybody to keep a cool head - and I'd like to focus on a question to Cpl Kendall (and a couple others in this thread), for a moment slightly away from Traviss's credentials:

What about Traviss's actual fiction bothers you?

I see her work as another version of the rest of the EU. Utter garbage, I have no time for it. And since she started on the Boba Fett track I won't even pick up the books in the store.

[GStone]

Yes because such a statement means that I must always be doing it.

Your posts of late in this thread show that if you aren't going full on troll, you are preferring to be troll-like.

No, all you've done is argue from an entrenched position based on ignorance and maybes.

What I've done is show that many of your conclusions are just jumping the gun.

Assume away then. You do understand that the civvie population of a garrison town usually exceeds the amount of military and family members, right?

Off hand, I can't think of a garrison town that's got more military people than civilians in the US, but I also don't know all the garrison towns in the US. I also don't know of all the garrison towns of all the other countries. Things might be different at some of them.