Announcement

**ZEE** · February 27, 2007, 15:20

Pekka...

i agree. i took down my flag icon because i didnt actually LIVE there, but it is a paradise to me. i will keep my flag empty for now...

**LordShiva** · February 27, 2007, 15:23

WTF is the FFL?

**Koyaanisqatsi** · February 27, 2007, 15:51

Fantasy Football League, last I knew. I think he's overstating the bonding aspect of it, though.

**LordShiva** · February 27, 2007, 15:55

Final Fantasy Fifty?

**DRoseDARs** · February 27, 2007, 16:26

Long last Mauritania!

**Sirotnikov** · February 27, 2007, 16:53

Why should I pledge my loyalty to a nation, and if I do, why is it any better than pledging your loyalty to an organization, group of people, a unit, what ever it is? It's still a collective, formed for one single goal. We condemn the other one, yet we praise the other one. To me it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Because in the current structure, a nation is the widest strongest unit type that can still support an ethos and united "cohesion".

You'd want to belong to a nation over any other group, mostly because of selfishness: a nation is usually the strongest most influential type of groups.

This of course is challenged all around the world - you have mafias, military organizations, corporate cartels, religious sects.

In some places, the other organizations "win" and then they become the 'face' of the country (read: acceptable political unit that has its own foreign relations). Just think of military coups (south america, syria, egypt) or religious coups (iran, taleban).

**Pekka** · February 27, 2007, 17:00

FFL is French Foreign Legion.

Siro, right, the question I was wondering more was that why the unit cohesion would be condemned, should it be constructed of hired guns? There's lots of moral and ethical questions, yet we seem to accept national armies with face value.

Why would we not feel the same for FFL? Some people feel it's dangerous, because they don't respect any national flags other than their unit flag. They are submitted to France, however, their loyalty is in their own org, and that somehow is 'dangerous'. And somehow there is no 'honour' in it anymore and it is in fact disgusting for some people.

I must disagree. I don't think the flag matters.

The most concerned voices usually think that these groups would be not as loyal to a cause and stay on course. As if national issues aren't the same.. So you wrap yourself around a flag, and think this is now different, and the reasoning usually is, that it protects our society, a society that is made of our citizens, there's a need to protect it or at least prepare for the worst should things happen.

That's fair enough. However, the 'honour' in it I still don't see being that much different. You're fighting for your family, sure. But since when did people of other nations really have beef with each other? Sometimes they do, but it's not about that.. it's an extension of politics, so rarely does it have anything to do with real beefing.

So what you have is an extension of politics, that acts when the political situation is what it is... I just don't see that being so different from what other groups are doing. It's just business at the end of the day. It's what we do.

And no, I don't think national armies are a bad idea

**Sirotnikov** · February 27, 2007, 17:24

I don't think it is very different.

It has a different scale and some different parameters but it is similar.

It is perfectly normal however, for one organized group (a nation) to be fearful of giving too much trust in another organized group (professional army) when it has little means of dealing with it, if it ever becomes rogue.

It also has to do with motivation.
People whose motivation is nationalistic, will serve the nation. Thus the nation has nothing to fear.

People whose motivation is the unit / money, may change sides eventually. Thus the nation is fearful of that situation.

**Pekka** · February 27, 2007, 17:29

Right, that's what I think as well. Pretty similar. Different scale and parameters, exactly.

But the FFL is also very loyal to the unit. They don't actually make decisions. So who ever makes those decisions, that's the people you need to worry about.

**laurentius** · February 27, 2007, 17:41

Re: Unit Cohesion

Originally posted by Pekka
As we should know, the FFL has one of the best unit cohesions in the world. So it made me think.. of course it's pretty simple considering the way they mold together, but it gave me a thought that why should flag matter. Why should your nationality matter?

We say war is OK if you defend your nation, your flag. But what is that really? It's not a good argument to make that it's only an imaginary thing, but then again, it is exactly that. An imaginary thing. Why should I pledge my loyalty to a nation, and if I do, why is it any better than pledging your loyalty to an organization, group of people, a unit, what ever it is? It's still a collective, formed for one single goal. We condemn the other one, yet we praise the other one. To me it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Warriors first, countrymen last.

Yeah. But whats the use of cohesion and brotherhood if you dont have a noble cause fight for?

All motivated soldiers fight for something. FFL fights for France. Period. They get to do some seriously ****ed up operations for France. Also the constant fear of dieing even in the normal training is a real good factor for bonding. To fight for an idea, freedom or your home is a priviledge.

Its like the first layer of loyalty is to yourself, the next to your squad, the next to your unit the next to something greater etc until you reach your own ideals. If you dont, you are fighting for the wrong cause.

**Pekka** · February 27, 2007, 17:59

Oh, I didn't know you get to decide what the good causes are

Most who decide to stay with the FFL do so because of the brotherhood. And they don't care for France. FFL fights for France in the big picture, but in the mindset of FFL and it's troops, they fight for themselves.

**laurentius** · February 27, 2007, 18:08

Well you do get to decide what the good cause are by not signing up to armies fighting for anything less.

I dont know how many FFL soldiers do you know but one of my childhood friends is in it at the moment and FYI they do fight for France.

**Pekka** · February 27, 2007, 18:13

Blah blah blah, yes they ARE under their command, if they weren't, they'd be a a real private army or something........ FFL is still more loyal to FFL than the French flag. If your friend says he fights for France rather than the FFL, he is a Frenchie lover and deserves to have his new identity as the permanent one

**laurentius** · February 27, 2007, 18:23

Thats kinda idealistic. The FFL is nothing more than a branch of the French military organisation for foreigners. To be more loyal to FFL would make no sence other than being loyal to your unit and squad in a certain layer. Ultimately you fight for the authority holding command over your unit, in this case the national security needs of the republic of France. To think otherwise is idealistic foolishness.

Announcement

Unit Cohesion

Unit Cohesion

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment