| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes From Iraq: Day 65 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 5/24/10 2:42:19 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
About a month ago, an email was circulated around the Army, stating that the familiar term "Battle Buddy" was being replaced by limp-wristed term "Warrior Companion". While this flavor of nonsense isn’t uncommon in Army land, this one immediately raised a few eyebrows.
First of all, it was sent by a Sergeant Jeff Okes. Not only is there not enough rank there (a change like this would normally come from a General Officer) but the purported source of this change happened to be J. Okes, which is a dead giveaway.
Second, the term "Warrior Companion" is really, really lame.
Third, and most telling, "Warrior Companion" has two more syllables to the term "Battle Buddy". The Army doesn’t ever add syllables. Everyone knows about the endless sea of acronyms, but you’ll find other syllable deductions all over the place as well. For instance, ranks are almost always abbreviated when spoken. You never address a Lieutenant Colonel as "Lieutenant Colonel So-and-so". Just "Colonel" or "Sir". Heck, even the word "Sergeant" is usually pronounced "Sarnt", solely for the sake of saving a syllable.
Finally, yesterday I found a Stars and Stripes article confirming that the "Warrior Companion" term was actually a joke, and "Battle Buddy" is here to stay.
The amusing thing is, the term "Warrior Companion" actually made it onto an official PSA graphic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "Deranged Gunman" | | "Notes From Iraq: Day 66" > |
|
|
|
|
