Re: [SG] Scenario with engineers

Or how about the Intel geek that missed the importance of that "almost"
missile looking thing parked there next to the van looking thing.  We
all
got important jobs.  We all need skills to get those jobs done.  So
please
no more of the "my dad can beat up your dad" discussions.

That Chuk Guy

PS and anyways everyone knows the the Comm. Maintenance troops are what
holds everything together. :)

>Actually, I just knee-jerked.	The point was that there are a lot of
>MOSes which require a complex mix of skills (try Cav Scouts on for
>size--those guys do, more or less, everything) under a great deal of
>pressure.  Sure, infantry get shot at, but their biggest risk on the
way
>to a fight is a blister.  Aviation types could get flown into a hill if
>their pilot is having a bad week.  Yeah, we all exist to get the
>maneuver elements (infantry and armor) to the right place in good
enough
>condition to have a decisive effect.  But to say that pure gunbunnies
>have more skills with worse consequences for failure is to overstate
the
>case.	Hell, even rear-echelon types aren't perfectly safe--even seen
an
>infuriated colonel holding a "discussion" with the REMF who fouled up
>his pay?
>
>John M. Atkinson
>