Post by papacheese on Feb 2, 2008 21:26:05 GMT -5
Too often, I find myself thinking about similarities that we share with the military. Our tasks are very much action oriented, can be life threatening, require exquisite planning and coordination, needs teamwork, and can be summarized quite nicely in those three options I've been yammering so much about in the MTC series: Offensive, Transitional, and Defensive.
Since all of us tend to invest a significant part of our ego in trying to affect a positive outcome, often regardless of the circumstances, I would submit that we should subscribe to a valid military philosophy that can also be used to emphasize the need for firefighter safety. Instead of "Everyone Goes Home", let's call it "Live to Fight Another Day".
Every military officer is trained to realistically assess their situation, resources, and abilities, then made a decision whether they should attack, delay, or retreat.
They are also taught that if they cannot bring enough resources to bear in a timely enough fashion, then the best options are either #2 or #3, usually referred to as "conservation of forces"
As I like to frequently expound, in this day and age of crappy construction and solid-fuel accessories, too often we find ourselves facing an impossibly difficult task, yet believe, in our heart of hearts, we MUST and WILL defeat our mortal enemy by hopelessly flinging ourselves into exceedingly dangerous situations.
Sometimes, as the saying goes, tis better we live to fight another day.
To put it bluntly, it's foolish to apply 19th century traditions to 21st century problems.
Since all of us tend to invest a significant part of our ego in trying to affect a positive outcome, often regardless of the circumstances, I would submit that we should subscribe to a valid military philosophy that can also be used to emphasize the need for firefighter safety. Instead of "Everyone Goes Home", let's call it "Live to Fight Another Day".
Every military officer is trained to realistically assess their situation, resources, and abilities, then made a decision whether they should attack, delay, or retreat.
They are also taught that if they cannot bring enough resources to bear in a timely enough fashion, then the best options are either #2 or #3, usually referred to as "conservation of forces"
As I like to frequently expound, in this day and age of crappy construction and solid-fuel accessories, too often we find ourselves facing an impossibly difficult task, yet believe, in our heart of hearts, we MUST and WILL defeat our mortal enemy by hopelessly flinging ourselves into exceedingly dangerous situations.
Sometimes, as the saying goes, tis better we live to fight another day.
To put it bluntly, it's foolish to apply 19th century traditions to 21st century problems.
