Ghost778, there have been many threads about the concept of warrior on the LF forums, though what I typed wasn't copied from any source (save for the quote). Sent you a PM btw. That $5000 wasn't just courses, but ammo for the courses, ammo for shooting here in TO, paying for martial arts/combatives training, etc. Unfortunately it all adds up pretty quick. If anybody has the opportunity though, I highly recommend a US company known as Tactical Repsonse Inc. Top notch training and the instructors are superb.
RCA, shooting and moving is shooting your weapon while you are moving. The term fire and movement is generally accepted to mean the infantry tactic of one person or a small team moving while being covered by another person or another small team. Sorry for the confusion.
Infanteer, I believe you have misunderstood the orientation and basis of my beliefs. You bring up the point of the traditional definition of warrior. As you'll see in my post, I rendered my own definition, hence my POV. I am well aware of the history of the samurai, and the development of the modern day professional soldier. This is nothing new to me. Your arguments have a flaw however. You mistakenly assume that because previous warrior cultures (or sub-sects of certain societies) were beaten by groupings of professional soldiers, it is due solely to the fact that one group saw itself as professional soldiers, and the other saw themselves as warriors. This is incorrect. For example, the samurai were defeated because they chose not to use firearms and thus train in their use and learn tactics suited to them, not because they were warriors. Yes, I know that it was because of their warrior beliefs that they chose not to use firearms, but that does not equate to them being warriors is why they failed, it equates to them not having a flexible viewpoint of warriordom being the reason they were defeated. I agree that several principles upheld by warriors throughout the ages (as well as the principles upheld by my own personal definition of warrior) are shared by professional soldiers. I don't dispute that. What I do dispute is your notion that all warriors, "relish personal combat and glory for their subculture." That was true of the samurai. That was true of other warrior cultures. That is not true of me or my definition of a warrior. I'll share with you a quote near and dear to my heart which lies in symbiosis with my definition of a warrior. I paraphrase here because the exact words seem to escape me at the moment. "A warrior does not seek a battle, to fight. Rather he believes that there are some causes worth giving one's all for." I don't seek battle. I don't want to fight. But I train, and I train, and I train in case, god forbid, the time comes when those skills would be needed. Because if those skills are needed, they are needed direly.
I think I can tell what your problem here is. You have completely skipped over my personal definition of warriodom, and applied historical examples to my character. That is absolutely incorrect and one could see that by checking my definition. I would also like to point out that I said that was my own definition. Different people see things differently, but the way of the warrior how I see it is how I live my life. Your comment, "...their level of cohesion and teamwork is unmatched (they accomplish their missions as a team, if you didn't know that..." troubles me. You seem to believe that because I think I am a warrior I cannot work well in a team oriented setting. Why? Because the samurai worked as individual warriors? Because other previous warrior cultures did? I have news for you, I am not Samurai, nor do I label myself a warrior from any other culture. You said yourself, that central to the excellent of the modern soldier is his dedication to the, "...art and science of armed conflict." That's exactly what I have. That's why I train ceaselessly. I don't consider myself part of an elite social sub-sect either. I consider myself prigileged enough to partake in the community of warriors, to learn from them, to dispense the miniscule amount of knowledge I have managed to attain over my brief time on this planet, and to enjoy the company of like minded people. I am no more, no less than those I protect. I would advise you to reread my previous post and stop applying historical definitions, attitudes, and cultural beliefs onto me, because you will find yourself, as you are now, way off the mark.
Edit to add: BTW, the Spartans viewed themselves as warriors and citizen soldiers, not as our current definition of professional soldiers.