To all of you?

Question

To all of you who boast that because the military is meeting it's recruitment goals it means there is support for the Iraq occupation, what about this? Lowering the standards is the only way to accomplish qoutas?

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

Answer 1

while i agree there is reform needed in the military, that's the wrong way. it just means more people on welfare after they get bcd's. if they would reform from within they wouldn't need to lower the standards

Answer 2

first off the first sentence says "Faced with higher recruiting goals" which means the bar has been raised and they are required to get more recruits. second all this article is about is getting rid of the waiver process that the recruiters have to go through to get someone with a minor criminal record in. These are the same people that have been joining for years except now they cut down on the red tape (they give examples in the article, it's a good article you should try reading the entire thing not just the headline).

Answer 3

I do not agree with your statement about supporting or not supporting the Iraq conflict.
I do not know if the true recruitment goals established in 2006 have been met in 2007.
I believe some form of compromise will have to be made to maintain a high standard in the military ranks and branch's.

Answer 4

It's a current American ideal... part of the "dumbing down" of our culture... If the recruits don't meet the standards- lower the standards.

Answer 5

there exist many true americans...compared to the five pointed star we draw with pencil and paper is the american star, teeming with nearly a third of a billion points... you, me, and so many others, friends, strangers, wealthy, and poor, the self indulgent, and those who are crying... the world is crying... and as old as you may think she is, she is like a child, lost and alone... and hungry.

when i was in high school i wanted to learn to build things with my hands... but the lack of such program offerings then and now is an embarrassing weakness in in this too proud nation... after high school i wanted to build worldwide, a happy home for every family on earth... but the army wouldn't have me... or the navy... or the peace corps.

politics and politicians have weakened america to the degree that we are a fading influence unless we go to war.

i wanted to go to war... a war on world poverty... not like the publicized war on poverty of lbj that never happened, not like turning my back on afghanistan while they publicy begged for american help the first week of june, 1977, when the ever popular jimmy carter and congress said"go to hell", which is where they've been ever since... i wanted to build peace, a lasting, growing peace, with that war on poverty... rivers in deserts, like the bible prophecies more than once... i guess we're telling the bible to go to hell too... with our lack of goodwill involvement.

we need to build and help develop those who are and have been for thousands of years, due to natural and manmade conditions, too weak to help themselves.

i was right in 1969 when the army said no to me and i'm right now... develop building skills throughout the military for present and future use... we don't need lower standards to attract recruits... we need better standards.

when i was a little boy the army was the school i wanted to go to... i always wanted to be a soldier... and these days and nights something inside me cries painfully when i think of what i share with uncle sam... we are both the soldier who never came

Answer 6

Oh no, the military always lowers standards when everything is going fine, and their quotas are being met. /end sarcasm

Answer 7

Lowering standards is not the way. It makes no sense to spend thousands, if not millions training someone only to have them fail because they couldn't hack the program. Raising compensation works, when combined with maintaining high standards..

Answer 8

its quite fitting since our military is committing war crimes over there instead of over here.