Gee Who Would Think Recruitments Would Be Met?

[RetiredGySgt]

"standards" change all the time in an all volunteer force. Answer this question.... Are the current standards lower then any other time for the US Military?

Answer this question also, Since the inseption of the All Volunteer force have the standards ever changed?

You answered no to the first question and yes to the second, shall I link those answers again?

 

[maineman]

the first question:

"Are the current standards lower then any other time for the US Military?"

answer: no.

the standards at earlier times for the US Military were lower that current standards. I gave one specific instance when the standards were lower then than now.

Your question does NOT read, "Are the current standards lower then at any other time for the US Military since the inception of the all volunteer force?"

I answered the question you asked, not the question you thought you asked.

and the second question:

"Since the inseption of the All Volunteer force have the standards ever changed?"

answer: yes, and I provided you a link to an article that discusses it.

I must admit that I do not do a great deal of studying of the recruitment standards for the armed forces. I do, however, have a beer or two every so often at my American Legion Post with a first class petty officer from the local Navy Recruiting Office. He knows that I am retired Navy and he and I have, therefore, struck up conversations about many things nautical. He told me about a year ago that things were tough for all the recruiters but moreso for Army and Marines due to Iraq. He told me that they had had to lower their standards to meet quotas. I gave you a link. I offer that anecdote. That's all I got and I really have no inclination to spend a nanosecond's time looking for something else to play gotcha with you. If that ain't enough, let's just agree to disagree. It really isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, is it?

 

[mattskramer]

..that elected members of Congress accused the ENTIRE military of being just like Nazi's for the actions of what 8 soldiers? ...

This seems like hype and exaggeration. To you have a link to a web site that proves your statement? Just as the people guilty of abuse were punished, did the elected members (more than one member) who supposedly made the accusation apologize?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This seems like hype and exaggeration. To you have a link to a web site that proves your statement? Just as the people guilty of abuse were punished, did the elected members (more than one member) who supposedly made the accusation apologize?

Are you serious? It was in the news , it was several liberal members of Congress doing a "tour" of the prison. And no I am not going to look for a link.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

the first question:

"Are the current standards lower then any other time for the US Military?"

answer: no.

the standards at earlier times for the US Military were lower that current standards. I gave one specific instance when the standards were lower then than now.

Your question does NOT read, "Are the current standards lower then at any other time for the US Military since the inception of the all volunteer force?"

..........Yes it does you chose to eliminate the front of the sentence..........

I answered the question you asked, not the question you thought you asked.

and the second question:

"Since the inseption of the All Volunteer force have the standards ever changed?"

answer: yes, and I provided you a link to an article that discusses it.

I must admit that I do not do a great deal of studying of the recruitment standards for the armed forces. I do, however, have a beer or two every so often at my American Legion Post with a first class petty officer from the local Navy Recruiting Office. He knows that I am retired Navy and he and I have, therefore, struck up conversations about many things nautical. He told me about a year ago that things were tough for all the recruiters but moreso for Army and Marines due to Iraq. He told me that they had had to lower their standards to meet quotas. I gave you a link. I offer that anecdote. That's all I got and I really have no inclination to spend a nanosecond's time looking for something else to play gotcha with you. If that ain't enough, let's just agree to disagree. It really isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, is it?

Sure thing, you have made a claim that is on your admission unproven, and nothing more than your wishful thinking...

 

[mattskramer]

Are you serious? It was in the news , it was several liberal members of Congress doing a "tour" of the prison. And no I am not going to look for a link.

What was the news source? I did a search. All that I could find was this one incident by one person. The Republicans made a big deal about it and he later appologized. It was a bunch to do about nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Durbin

Sen. Durbin became a hot media topic on June 14, 2005, when on the U.S. Senate floor he compared interrogation techniques used at Camp X-Ray, Guantanamo Bay, as reported by the FBI, with those utilized by such regimes as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the Khmer Rouge:

When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here — I almost hesitate to put them in the record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18–24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold....On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

Durban’s comments drew bipartisan criticism, claiming that comparing U.S. actions to such regimes was insulting to both the U.S. and to victims of genocide. Radio host Rush Limbaugh and White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove accused Durbin of treason, while former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich called on the Senate to censure Durbin. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, whose son Patrick is serving in US Army, also called on Durbin to apologize for his remarks saying that “I think it's a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military would act like that”. The leader of the Veterans of Foreign Wars also demanded an apology, as did the Anti-Defamation League Durbin at first refused, but on June 21, 2005, went before the Senate to tearfully apologize for his statement, saying, "More than most people, a senator lives by his words ... occasionally words fail us, occasionally we will fail words."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What was the news source? I did a search. All that I could find was this one incident by one person. The Republicans made a big deal about it and he later appologized. It was a bunch to do about nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Durbin

Sen. Durbin became a hot media topic on June 14, 2005, when on the U.S. Senate floor he compared interrogation techniques used at Camp X-Ray, Guantanamo Bay, as reported by the FBI, with those utilized by such regimes as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the Khmer Rouge:

When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here — I almost hesitate to put them in the record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18–24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold....On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

Durban’s comments drew bipartisan criticism, claiming that comparing U.S. actions to such regimes was insulting to both the U.S. and to victims of genocide. Radio host Rush Limbaugh and White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove accused Durbin of treason, while former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich called on the Senate to censure Durbin. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, whose son Patrick is serving in US Army, also called on Durbin to apologize for his remarks saying that “I think it's a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military would act like that”. The leader of the Veterans of Foreign Wars also demanded an apology, as did the Anti-Defamation League Durbin at first refused, but on June 21, 2005, went before the Senate to tearfully apologize for his statement, saying, "More than most people, a senator lives by his words ... occasionally words fail us, occasionally we will fail words."

No, it was at least one female member of Congress ( House and she was with several others) and they were IN Iraq.

 

[mattskramer]

Are you serious? It was in the news , it was several liberal members of Congress doing a "tour" of the prison. And no I am not going to look for a link.

There exists a pink elephant with two trunks and webbed feet, but it only has three legs. I know that it out there. I saw it but I don’t have to prove it to you. You go find it.

 

[mattskramer]

No, it was at least one female member of Congress ( House and she was with several others) and they were IN Iraq.

I don’t buy it without proof. If such happened, the incident was probably greatly exaggerated and blown out of proportion. Prove it. Give me a fact-filled article from a reputable news agency or, as far as I’m concerned, it did not happen as you claim.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don’t buy it without proof. If such happened, the incident was probably greatly exaggerated and blown out of proportion. Prove it. Give me a fact-filled article from a reputable news agency or, as far as I’m concerned, it did not happen as you claim.

I don't care what you believe.

 

[mattskramer]

I don't care what you believe.

LOL. And I thought RSR was the only person who does not back up his claims with intelligent discourse, statistical evidence and support. What class and integrity. Oh well. Have you found that pink elephant yet?

 

[maineman]

Sure thing, you have made a claim that is on your admission unproven, and nothing more than your wishful thinking...

what the fuck are you talking about? I provided you with a link that delineated the fact that standards have been lowered because of the Iraq war in order to make quota. Can you even fucking READ?

 

[Truthmatters]

Dont these people read the news?

That was all over the place at the time it came out.

 

[mattskramer]

what the fuck are you talking about? I provided you with a link that delineated the fact that standards have been lowered because of the Iraq war in order to make quota. Can you even fucking READ?

Yes. You did provide a link from a fairly reputable source to back up your statement that standards have been lowered.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm

I wish that RetiredGySgt would provide a link to support his claim that elected members of Congress accused the ENTIRE military of being just like Nazi's. Do you know of any such incident aside from Durbin’s poor statement?

 

[Annie]

what the fuck are you talking about? I provided you with a link that delineated the fact that standards have been lowered because of the Iraq war in order to make quota. Can you even fucking READ?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it normal for any institution with 'requirements' to lower them in toto or part, if they wish to attract more or specific groups to apply?

Have you seen anything in the new requirements that would lead you to believe that those now enlisting are inferior troops to what has gone before?

 

[CSM]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it normal for any institution with 'requirements' to lower them in toto or part, if they wish to attract more or specific groups to apply?

Have you seen anything in the new requirements that would lead you to believe that those now enlisting are inferior troops to what has gone before?

If anyone really cares, here is a link to the official Army reglation regarding enlistments (AR 601-210):

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r601_210.pdf

If you are really interested and/or just can't sleep you might actually read it. I did but then I am used to reading such things and was already familiar with this particular regulation.

If you want to take my word for it, the changes made in standards ('lowering' if you like) are mostly in relation to minor traffic offenses, nonviolent misdemeanors and that sort of thing. Test score requirements are the same as they were and have been for some time. Physical and age requirements are the same.

Essentially, the Army is now admitting convicted speeders into our forces! Given the situation in Iraq, they are probably needed.

 

[Annie]

If anyone really cares, here is a link to the official Army reglation regarding enlistments (AR 601-210):

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r601_210.pdf

If you are really interested and/or just can't sleep you might actually read it. I did but then I am used to reading such things and was already familiar with this particular regulation.

If you want to take my word for it, the changes made in standards ('lowering' if you like) are mostly in relation to minor traffic offenses, nonviolent misdemeanors and that sort of thing. Test score requirements are the same as they were and have been for some time. Physical and age requirements are the same.

Essentially, the Army is now admitting convicted speeders into our forces! Given the situation in Iraq, they are probably needed.

Thanks for that input CSM! Kinda what I thought.

 

[jillian]

For all branches? Guess they are all coming from the 20% that thinks the war is great? But that CAN'T be! Those 20% are all chicken hawks!

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/mi..._strong_despite_publics_alleged_dissatisfact/

Er...no... they lowered the recruitment goals and have taken people who never before would have been allowed into the military.

 

[Annie]

Er...no... they lowered the recruitment goals and have taken people who never before would have been allowed into the military.

already being discussed. Dollar short and a day late.

 

[maineman]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it normal for any institution with 'requirements' to lower them in toto or part, if they wish to attract more or specific groups to apply?

Have you seen anything in the new requirements that would lead you to believe that those now enlisting are inferior troops to what has gone before?

Of COURSE they are "inferior" !!! What do you think "lowering standards" means??? If that is not the absolute Webster's defintion of the word "inferior", what is???????