Originally posted by Agressor:
[quote]Originally posted by robertteh:
[b]
What purpose does the chain of command serve except to conceal
wrongdoings by the superior who could then act rashly resulting in
dunking yet not being directly implicated because such chain of
command prevents him from being held accountable.
If we want to have good and effective army there is a need to
overhaul shielding of errors by the present chain of command.
In fact any army officer who is not held responsible for wrongful
acts like dunking is not worth the salt as in war he could run
away.
If they want to avoid being held accountable they might as well
become a cook.
We need a good army where commander in charge will be the first to
answer for any problems affecting his men and discipline.
So the present system is a wrong strategy and we will not win a war
if this thing goes on for too long as all the soldiers will skive
too and avoid fighting like his commander.[/quote
On the other hand, over protective give trainers a lot of red
tapes. We might end up training good computer war game players
rather than good soldiers. No wonder we are so good in Cyber
Olympics. We have 2 years compulsary training.
Do not get me wrong, I am not saying Dunking is correct. I merely
meant that training should be realistic. You cannot expect POW
trainer to only spray water at you. [/b]
The dunking matter is done in a wrong manner in which reservist
who went thru the training complained during an interview with
reporter that
they found out the training was illegal from the start.
