|
|
|
Stare Master
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 2:00 PM
Posts: 9,816,
Visits: 52,021
|
|
| We are rapidly approaching a crisis in the military. http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/04/military_groundforces_draft_070417w/
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American GI. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.
"History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over." COLONEL BULL SIMONS
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:38 AM
Posts: 5,783,
Visits: 4,085
|
|
Gee, bit of a political spin in that article...
yes, we do need to increase the size of our military ad yes they are likely pretty well tired out.
But seems this article was more of a push to end the ban on gays, and a little bit of mudslinging on the part of Ge. McCaffrey towards the character of our troops.
"“Ten percent of Army recruits are of low caliber and do not belong in uniform,” he said, noting that the number of moral waivers has increased, the percentage of high school graduates has dropped, and the average age of first-time enlistees is rising."When I enlisted, you could get in without a High School Diploma, and I do believe they were a little more lenient when it came to "Moral Waivers". This is not something new, and it sure did not have a overwhelming negative affect when I entered the Service. some of the best guys I knew had no high School diploma, and had even had themselves a few run ins with the law...
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe we are taking in convicted felons into the Army. As far as the other "expert" Mr. Korb goes.. well let's see, he works for a liberal Think Tank founded by a former Clinton Administartion Official. Responsible for Murthas "strategic redeployment"(cut and run) plan for iraq. They received their start up funding from our good friend george Soros, and are the darlings of "Air America" (Al franken) and other left leaning media. or as they put it, "Progressive" outlets.
Maybe the message is being killed by the messengers for me. I am not opposed to strengthening our military, but I am opposed to the rhetoric and some obvious political motivation behind one of the experts opinions.
Abraham Lincoln (quiet, reserved and selfless): “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here” -Gettysburg Address
Obama (egotistical): “Now the world will watch and remember what we do here”
|
|
|
|
|
Stare Master
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 2:00 PM
Posts: 9,816,
Visits: 52,021
|
|
| AC, in the nineties, as with any RIF, standards for enlistment were tightened substantially. I think in the mid- to late-nineties there were better than 95% of enlistees with diplomas and waivers for those who had gotten in any type of trouble were few and far between. Over the last two or three years those standards have been relaxed somewhat along with the age standards. There may be some felons that get waivers, but I don't believe that are any with convictions from violent crimes. My feeling during the nineties was that the restrictions were too tight in that I think some people deserve a second chance. As for Korb you may be right. The proposals he is pushing are certainly among those liberals are pushing. Overall I think the point is valid about the increases not providing the relief, at least in the immediate future. But as far as a draft goes the political reality is that there is no chance of it being reinstated.
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American GI. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.
"History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over." COLONEL BULL SIMONS
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-social
 
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 6:06 AM
Posts: 1,890,
Visits: 13,045
|
|
Seeings how they have to recruit 42 year olds just to make the current goals, I don't see how they are going to get the bodies for any increase anyway
1/508th Abn Inf, 82nd Abn Div 81-83 1/4th Inf (Mech), 3rd Inf Div (USAEUR) 83-84 SGT\EIB\Recondo "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:38 AM
Posts: 5,783,
Visits: 4,085
|
|
509Trooper (4/17/2007)
AC, in the nineties, as with any RIF, standards for enlistment were tightened substantially. I think in the mid- to late-nineties there were better than 95% of enlistees with diplomas and waivers for those who had gotten in any type of trouble were few and far between. Over the last two or three years those standards have been relaxed somewhat along with the age standards. There may be some felons that get waivers, but I don't believe that are any with convictions from violent crimes. My feeling during the nineties was that the restrictions were too tight in that I think some people deserve a second chance. As for Korb you may be right. The proposals he is pushing are certainly among those liberals are pushing. Overall I think the point is valid about the increases not providing the relief, at least in the immediate future. But as far as a draft goes the political reality is that there is no chance of it being reinstated. I know that it was darned near impossible to get any type of waiver in the mid 90's. moral, nedical, education, it did not matter. The Army was trying to cut personnel then, not hold onto the....
I see this posturing about the "increase" in waivers as much ado about nothing. During the 90's it was easy to turn away potential recruits for reasons that would have been only given a glancing view in the 80's. this is just a shift back to what was policy back then, if you want to join you can as long as you are not a felon, or a total imbecile...
I also agree the numbers needed and talked about are not coming fast enough, and in hindsight an expansion was needed even before 9/11.
Oh, and RD as to 42 year olds... This 42 year old would jump at the chance to serve again, except there is no waiver for me when it comes to my injuries. I am also pretty sure that while the Army opened that door, the numbers are relatively small in the expanded age group compared to what has been the typical age group of recruits.
Short of a draft it was a good decision in my opinion. I do not support the Draft, I feel it has too many escape clauses.
Abraham Lincoln (quiet, reserved and selfless): “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here” -Gettysburg Address
Obama (egotistical): “Now the world will watch and remember what we do here”
|
|
|
|
|
Hard Charger
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 11/27/2008 5:29 PM
Posts: 2,248,
Visits: 3,071
|
|
AC your comment on the 42 year olds is correct, I'm approaching 42 with great rapidity, however I cannot fathom just starting out as a know nothing private at age 42 yet that's who I'm seeing coming in in some instances. I'm seeing more serious mental health issues and I'm seeing a higher degree of thugary than I've seen before. Yes, this artical has a political agenda, as does most of what Army Times prints, but there is a fair amount of truth to what they are saying
"...my religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as in bed. God has fixed the time for my death. I do not concern myself about that, but to be always ready, no matter when it may overtake me." He added, after a pause, looking me full in the face: "That is the way all men should live, and then all would be equally brave" General "Stonewall" Jackson
|
|
|
|