PsyOps
Pixelated
I salute you and your service. I’m not arguing whether standards should be maintained or higher or lower. I’m challenging your defamatory language regarding those who do serve or will serve. It comes across as arrogant. I’m on board with many others in here about taking tests as a measure for qualifying for service. I am a poor test taker. This made it hard for me to make rank (because the system weighed test-taking so high). Because of this I retired as an E-6, rather than a much-desired higher rank. So, even though I might have been viewed as less intelligent (or maybe even retarded) in some badly-informed eyes I considered myself to be an expert at my job. Regardless of what intellectual level you may define someone, they are doing what most will never do, and that’s sacrifice all they have to defend our country and your right to call them retarded. To not hold the highest respect for them (as I do you), regardless of the standards that allowed them to serve, equates to a spit in their face.Coventry17 said:
Bustem' Down
Give Peas a Chance
Merlin99 said:I think that I'd like it to be a requirement to vote. (let the red karma begin)
Make it like the Romans? Military service is the requirement for all citizens, and a requirement for citizenship?
T
tikipirate
Guest
"About 17 percent of the first-time recruits, or about 13,600, were accepted under waivers for various medical, moral or criminal problems, including misdemeanor arrests or drunk driving. That is a slight increase from last year, the Army said.
Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral" reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for medical reasons and 7 percent were drug and alcohol problems, including those who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs."
So let's break it down...
More than half were originally disallowed for misdemeanor arrests, which, at that age, means fights.
More than one-third probably suffered from asthma, easily controlled by bronchial inhalers. (You pack those with your spare mags.) Or "flat feet", and only God knows what that means in these days of orthotics.
More than one-sixteenth admitted to using drugs, unlike 100% of our recent presidents who have lied.
So this year we admitted twice as many fighting, honest, slightly bronchially or podiatrically imperfect troops as we usually do to fight against the people who want to kill the XXX million people of the free world. Looks like no ethical dillemma to me.
Until Al-Quaida or Hezbollah establishes strict entry standards, I say we welcome these patriots with open arms.
And who says they are dumb?
Of those accepted under waivers, more than half were for "moral" reasons, mostly misdemeanor arrests. Thirty-eight percent were for medical reasons and 7 percent were drug and alcohol problems, including those who may have failed a drug test or acknowledged they had used drugs."
So let's break it down...
More than half were originally disallowed for misdemeanor arrests, which, at that age, means fights.
More than one-third probably suffered from asthma, easily controlled by bronchial inhalers. (You pack those with your spare mags.) Or "flat feet", and only God knows what that means in these days of orthotics.
More than one-sixteenth admitted to using drugs, unlike 100% of our recent presidents who have lied.
So this year we admitted twice as many fighting, honest, slightly bronchially or podiatrically imperfect troops as we usually do to fight against the people who want to kill the XXX million people of the free world. Looks like no ethical dillemma to me.
Until Al-Quaida or Hezbollah establishes strict entry standards, I say we welcome these patriots with open arms.
And who says they are dumb?
Merlin99 said:I think that I'd like it to be a requirement to vote. (let the red karma begin)
The military provides money for college as well. This being the case, entering college right out of high school should not provide an "OUT" for people who don't want to serve.
I think every able body over the age 18 should serve at least 2 years in the military or some other public service. Along with this idea, I feel as though anyone in this catagory who doesn't want to serve should be banned from other government jobs including any political office.
Good posttikipirate said:
scottrobts
New Member
The lower they make the standards the harder it becomes for those in charge. I don't know what positions you held in the military, but whenever I had to screen the service record of someone who had shown an inability to understand and follow the UCMJ and Naval Regualtions, normally the first thing I saw was the waivers from his/her recruiter that allowed him to enter the Navy. Now I see that the Army is going to be nicer and gentler in its boot camp and require its drill instructors to be less likely to yell and use abusive language. We can only hope that they dont encounter yelling or rough language in combat as well.
chernmax
NOT Politically Correct!!
slaphappynmd said:
First off, your sentence structure sucks!!! What exactly does this mean? "So what does this say about of military?" Second, just because a soldier enters the service with strikes against him doesn't mean he cannot turn his life around with motivation, training, discipline and some self respect.
I was a high school drop out with 2 strikes against me in the late 70's running the street of NYC, 24 years later I retired honorably as an Officer with a college degree and a superb second career.
You should give it a try dumbazz...
Yeah, because their "military" is made up of such a bunch of geniuses.slaphappynmd said:
Toxick
Splat
slaphappynmd said:
So what?
With the dumbing down of America - thanks to the touchy-feely pukes who have decimated our education system - is it really much of a surprise that the average IQ in ANY field is dropping?
'Sides, you don't have to be amongst the intelligencia to be a soldier, or a hero.
You only need to know which end of the gun to hold, and at whom to point the other end.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Tox… “Intelligencia”? You speak of intelligence by using fictitious words? Okay, we have established certain levels of intellect. Now tell me, would you be able to identify the signature sound of an AK-47 vs. an M-16? If so, why is this important? How about this… What is the operational launch distance of a 170mm Strix mortar projectile, and what unique technology does it employ as apposed to other legacy mortar weaponry? What new network communications technology will allow an IP address to be assigned to every piece of equipment used out in the field (i.e. cell phones, blackberrys, GPS devices, smart weapons, phones, radios, etc...) that will allow satellite uplinks for each device to a central command center for accurate tracking of friendly military vs. enemy to avoid battlefield mishaps and perfect targeting?Toxick said:
I hope this short lecture has enlightened you on your erroneous and insulting assessment of our soldier “intelligencia”.
scottrobts
New Member
the thing everyone who has never been in the military does not realize, and what psyops tried to point out, is that the military doens't recruit people to clean laterines and does not want people to clean laterines. it needs people who can think on their feet, who can lead others, can follow commands that make no sense and seem ludicrious but are vitally important. I have had 18 and 19 year olds who were responsible for not only managing several millions of dollars worth of equipment, but had to make sure that they made no mistakes what so ever in their work, because if they did people would die. America's military does not need dummies, it needs people who meet the minimum criteria and go way beyond it. The lower they make the standards, the harder it will be for everyone else in the military.
MMDad
Lem Putt
itsbob said:
Anyone who would brag about a 96! I have twenty that says you didn't beat mine!
I got the highest possible score, but I would have been a terrible soldier. I am a great test taker, which just means that I do well on tests even if I don't know the subject matter well. Some knowledgable people do not test well, even if they know the material.
Forrest Gump may be fiction, but it is an example of how even less intelligent people can be a great asset to the military. Sometimes you need people who follow orders without questioning the order.
The reason I would have made a terrible soldier is that I had not yet learned that sometimes your superiors don't care if you have a better idea, the just want you to STFU and do as you are told.
We are giving more people the ability to better themselves by joining the military. We are also putting more people into the training pipelines, which allows more oppurtunity to cut out the slackers. Sounds like a win-win to me!
Last edited: