Prev: Re: Nobility.... or not.... Next: RE: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale

Re: Unit pride was RE: Questions regarding NAC ground units

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:09:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Unit pride was RE: Questions regarding NAC ground units


--- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> G'day guys,
 
> Well as someone with no military experience and no
> associations to call upon
> (and hopefully without stirring up this joint into
> anymore of a hornets nest
> than it already is, I'm not trying to be insulting
> or start a new round of
> chest pounding and profanity I'm honestly, and if I
> dare say it innocently,
> interested), could you guys give me a (quick)
> perspective on why it matters
> so much? 

<TiC>
Uh. . . I don't know.  I just know it does.  Everyone
around you acts as if it's important, so it must be
important.
</TiC>

Seriously, it's hard to explain.  Except that history,
lineage, traditions, and honors are emphasised so much
that you can't help it.  Rather like family--I might
pick on a guy in my platoon, but damned if I'll let
anyone else do so.  
 
> steady and constant thing. So
> is all this pride in unit history there so that you
> don't let the side down
> when it comes your turn or is it the hope that you
> won't let the side down?

More or less--that's why these things got started. 
Units with a sense of history made people stand and
fight so as not to disgrace The Legion ('coz Romans
are the ones that started it).	The Brits just renamed
them Regiments, but the psychology is still the same.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com


Prev: Re: Nobility.... or not.... Next: RE: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale