Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jan 11, 2006.
Read my lips: No new drafts!
No drafts, just a burgeoning army of corporate mercenaries responsible to noone but their shareholders.
How hard are the army tests that people are having trouble passing them? Anybody here ever take one? I'm curious. I'm sure it's not the GMAT - my personal measure of self-worth.
during my senior year in HS, we took some kind of army aptitude test. i've no idea if it was the same as what's given to those trying to enlist, or how much it's changed over the years (this was a while ago), but the one i took was dead easy.
I was in the army. It's fairly easy. The army's decision to take more Category IV recruits is nothing new. Like the article says, it was just one month, October, that they took more IV recruits. The policy clearly states no more than 4% annually. Unless the L.A. Times can provide evidence that this is a transitioin of that policy, then this is nothing different.
I took the aptitude test given by the Marine Corps in 1998. It was dead easy as well.
i think the point of the article, and certainly my take from it, is less "there may be illegal recruiting" and more "look at the measures being taken to meet recruiting goals".
I think the heart of a man or woman and their desire to serve their country ought to be on equal footing with their mental capacity. Obviously, some may not be qualified for combat roles, but there are other jobs that can be done.
Someone who can't pass a basic test probably has little chance in the real world. I would imagine that some of them see it as a meal ticket with bennies involved. Obviously without actual profiles of these low performers it's impossible gauge how closely the bottom of the barrel is being scraped. As far as serving their country is concerned, your flag waving is gettin a little oppressive.
Also, it's a high tech army these days, the food service in Iraq has been contracted out to Halliburton. What kind of "other" jobs did you have in mind?
Sorry, I'm not going to apologize for loving my country.
I don't know what other jobs I have in mind. Maybe something stateside like helping out with cleaning up New Orleans.
Doesn't that miss the entire point though? The army needs soldiers not glorified santitation workers. Soldiers that can read write and communicate with increasingly high tech equipment. If they don't have these skills, and surely they don't if they can't pass a basic test, then they're really little more than cannon fodder.
So, what exactly do you love about your country? How many other countries have you been to? I find that those who have travelled are much more likely to see through propaganda.
Even though your post wasn't directed towards me, as a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom I'll attempt to answer your snobbish blanket statements a.k.a. questions.
I've worked with many soldiers that scored low on the apt test. Although their "booksmarts" were not up to par with many, they were excellent resources in terms of the skills that they had learned before and after training. For every combat soldier, there are ten support soldiers. My grandfather would have scored low on the apt test, as he left school at 13 and began working. He was a brilliant machinist, and through his skill became a manager for a large steel corp. Through his natural ability of administration, he became the first mayor of Beech Bottom, WV, a former steel town. You ridiculous assumption that these soldiers are nothing more than cannon fodder is baseless, offensive, and ignorant.
As for your second statement, I've lived (not just visited or toured via the military) in England, Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Guess what? I still love my country and am proud to be a citizen.
I went to Canada once eh?
I thnk OnceUgoMac 'it the nail on the 'ead eh govna?
The fact that the armed services are scraping the bottom of the barrel is a pretty good indication that the overall quality of the armed services is probably going to go down hill. bushco's much lauded but unfunded and penalty rich no child left behind penalises schools whose students don't pass and yet those same students are deemed fit for service. There's a lot of hypocrisy hiding behind such actions.
The armed services in the US have a long history of putting the least qualified on the front lines. My assertion is by no means ignorant, baseless, snobbish and whatever other adjectives that ougm used but a matter of history. buscho is simply trying to avoid the draft on his watch. The continued occupation of Iraq means that a draft is inevitable so it's quite obvious that the pentagon is doing everything possible to maintain troop levels as long as possible by crook or hook.
He's had plenty of practice there.
Edit: You know, on second thought, I'm just going to stay out of this one.
hm hardly surprising .. after all they have some goals to achieve.. was similiar here in austria.. where they sort out all those who aren't "fit" enough.. some years they take nearly everybody and other years when they are plenty they are more picky
i had the "luck" to get a spring date .. (which normally means: hardly any students) and we had lots of HiDis ("Hilfsdienst" = "Support Service" ) who had to mow lawns, clean windows, etc. and were available for doing random things if one of us writers/assistents needed a helping hand like with washing out food container etc.
an army can use a lot of low scoring recruits... it's always possible to find something to do ... that's why you learn how to "look busy" pretty good in an army
Ah, a story that just begs for the byline writer to typeset:
An Army of Dumb?
I scored a 95 or something on a pre-ASVAB test. My algebra was very rusty.
That's not a job for the active federal military. Neither practically nor legally.
What if those jobs are filled?
I tried to enlist and was denied because of my history of (very controlled) asthma. Should my heart and desire to serve have been on equal footing with my physical capacity?
But I think the military has changed a lot and has fewer of those kinds of roles. We have so many civilian contractors for the support roles (food, laundry, etc). The idea seems to be to reduce the military down to combat/logistics/leadership and contract out for everything else. Not much room there for the unqualified.
Of course, this works for the army and air force but not so well for the navy. You still need Navy cooks on the ship.
I took both the little in-recruiting office and the main text at a naval base in 1999. It was very easy for me. If I had passed the physical and actually had joined I probably would have gotten stationed anywhere I would want (I would have like to be stationed in Germany as most of my family lives there). I was that good.
Dumb people can still be damn good at what they do.
THis is not a personal knock to anyone but a huge NON-PC stereotyping:
plumbers, electricians, car mechanics etc can ALL do stuff most people have no idea where to begin at. And yet they arent going to be inventing the next cancer drug or scoring high on an aptitude test.
Thats what the army is, well trained ONE skill people. One major skill, KILL, engineer, shipping, medic, food service etc etc. And they do it well. There is no point in training cannon fodder to do more than one major thing. So in the end we have alot of good soldiers, but not smart people.
Or something like that.
To say the least