Military may lower standards for recruits, again

[ck4829]

Faced with higher recruiting goals, the Pentagon is quietly looking for ways to make it easier for people with minor criminal records to join the military, The Associated Press has learned.

The review, in its early stages, comes as the number of Army recruits needing waivers for bad behavior — such as trying drugs, stealing, carrying weapons on school grounds and fighting — rose from 15 percent in 2006 to 18 percent this year. And it reflects the services' growing use of criminal, health and other waivers to build their ranks.

Overall, about three in every 10 recruits must get a waiver, according to Pentagon statistics obtained by AP, and about two-thirds of those approved in recent years have been for criminal behavior. Some recruits must get more than one waiver to cover things ranging from any criminal record, to health problems such as asthma or flat feet, to low aptitude scores — and even for some tattoos.

The goal of the review is to make cumbersome waiver requirements consistent across the services — the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force — and reduce the number of petty crimes that now trigger the process. Still, some Army officers worry that disciplinary problems will grow as more soldiers with records, past drug use and behavior problems are brought in.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071106/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/military_waivers

[Selatius]

1. These posters sum it up:

[SteppingRazor]

2. In some ways, even without the war, they should've done this a long time ago.

Getting caught smoking a joint should not preclude you from serving your country.

Of course, the only reason they're doing this is because there's a war on, but on a pure principle level, I can't say I disagree with allowing people with nonviolent criminal infractions to serve in the military.

[lpbk2713]

3. WOW! What an excellent way to reduce street crime!!

Recruit entire street gangs. Thirty or forty punks at a time.

Damn!! That BushCo thinks of everything!! :sarcasm:

[ShortnFiery]

4. Good luck at keeping adequate numbers of Company Grade Officers and NCOs to lead these recruits.

:thumbsdown:

Anyone who doesn't want to go home "in a box" would be wise to steer away from College R.O.T.C. and the Service Academies. :shrug:

The military is already top-heavy with Senior NCOs and Field Grade Officers (Majors and above). There's going to be a serious CRUNCH at snagging and keeping QUALITY LTs, CPTs, SSGs and SFCs.

It's just common sense - Would you wish to lead a platoon or a company of misfits when your life, and that of your fellow soldiers depends on their intelligence, awareness and competence after a 10 week basic course? :wow: Just IMAGINE - patrolling through an area of Baghdad with a squad filled with mostly clones of "Earnest T. Bass" and "Gomer Pyle." :scared: :(

[Thothmes]

5. Not much different

then patrolling in the Mekong delta or Ia Drang (sic) valley in Viet Nam.

[ShortnFiery]

6. Back then ... after the horrific experience of The Vietnam War, many of us pledged

"Never again!" ... History is repeating itself in a very ugly way.

And The American People are in a mixed state of complacency (go shopping!) and learned-helplessness (aftermath of fear mongering burn-out) :(