close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Army lowering it standards.......again?

Discussion in 'US Army Forum' started by urbanjunglist, Nov 13, 2006.

  1. I find it truly amazing that the Army is having a tough time retaining "people". I care not to call them soldiers because from what I seen before in my deployments was just garbage. It really makes good quality soldiers(if the shoe fits wear it) look bad. I seen this spec 4 that looked like he could be my grand father, whats up with that? I admire people who want to serve there country but come on people, what good is he really going to do when the @#$% goes down? Another question is is the Army ACU's supposed to be form fitting? I seen one soldier walking around in some that looked like spandex, what gives?
     
  2. FDC

    FDC

    219
    0
    Apr 9, 2006
    You don't get out much do you? Yeah, there are sh!tbags in every unit. Instead of griping about it, look in the mirror, then square away every violater you see.

    ETA: Be part of the solution.
     


  3. The Army so fit to make "their solution the problem". Do I need say more? THE ARMY IS LOWERING THEIR STANDARDS TO MAKE MISSION........ I can go on and on with this. Granted every unit has its own turds, it doesnt help letting more in.
     
  4. FDC

    FDC

    219
    0
    Apr 9, 2006
    Please "go on and on". While I definitely agree, some standards have been adjusted it's still what happens in the unit that makes the Soldier.

    Note---An example of "adjusted" would be previously allowing a small number of Cat IVs in. Now we increase that number slightly.
     
  5. Im not trying to bad mouth the Army in all means, but Im really trying to understand the method for their madness on that.
     
  6. FDC

    FDC

    219
    0
    Apr 9, 2006
    I'll be the 1st to admit the quality of new Soldiers has gone downhill since I came in in 92. While I'm sure every generation of Soldiers looks at the new guys, and thinks "are we scraping the bottom of the barrel?", I believe the mean quality of new Soldiers has slipped.
    I truthfully don't feel it's a case of the Army "lowering standards", I think it's a case of the Army adjusting to the current pool of recruits. Do I agree with it? In most cases NO, but it really isn't that bad.
    You may see a whole bunch of stats about letting criminals in. Some of that is society's fault by charging kids for every stupid thing under the sun. Also, some of it is technology. A recruit used to be able to get away with concealing law violations as long as his job didn't require a clearance. Now the ENTNAC comes back within 48 hours, and there is no hiding the law violation. Recruiters are being forced to list all the violations, and run moral waivers. hence the appearance we allow more criminals in.
    As far as age goes, I do believe the Army is adjusting to the market. I don't like it. I know there are quite a few guys in their late 30s that would be better Soldiers than ANY punk kid. I still believe the Army is a young man's game.
    Body fat/weight standards are pretty cut and dry for anyone going through MEPS. Weight issues in the unit is a failure on the individual, and the unit's leadership. All it takes is a little PT, or a little paperwork to fix a weight problem. The individual fails by gaining the weight. The leadership fails by not PTing/dieting the crap out of the offender. The unit also fails by not thoroughly documenting the weight failures, and then kicking them out. Many units do this well, some don't.
    Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should review AR 601-210. It's not that easy to squeeze someone into the "fully qualified" category according to that reg. Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should be prepared to walk for 3 years in a recruiter's shoes.
     
  7. Im seriously looking into a interservice transfer into the Army and going warrant officer with the flight program. I just look around and see soldiers these days and ask myself if I really want to "down grade". Granted the Marine Corps has its share of overweight people, at least they are more stringent on the rules governing if they are "accepted" into either enlistment or if they get there commissioned as either a warrant or regular officer. My job as a NCO is to enforce the rules and regulations governing the Marine Corps (as well as the armed forces). Maybe Im overlooking something how the Army "runs things".
     
  8. Sam White

    Sam White I miss you bud Silver Member

    1,472
    0
    Nov 17, 2001
    South Dakota
    FDC made an excellent post. The entry standards aren't any "lower" than they were in the past: it's on the soldier and the soldier's unit to enforce the standards once that soldier leaves Basic and AIT.

    The difference you see between the Marine Corps and the Army, IMO, is a difference in the nature of the services. The Marines have a culture of being hard, fit, warriors. Much of the Army feels the same but there is also a large element of the Army that sees it as "just a job." The Army is also the largest of the services and needs more bodies.

    The unit I served in was a Reserve unit and was a support unit (chemical), so that's my point of reference. We were always short and the leadership looked the other way regarding wieght, pt, uniforms, etc. because they needed bodies. They were good at their job, but they made a less than hooah impression on strangers.

    I have met some Marines who've made the switch (came to Army Reserve) for more opportunities (more variety of jobs, assignments, commissions, etc.) who were satisfied with their decision.
     
  9. In your alls opinion, what is the biggest difference between the guard and regular active duty?
     
  10. LBTRS

    LBTRS NRA Patron Life

    85
    0
    Dec 12, 2004
    Goodyear, AZ
    Unfortunately they must do this or you would find yourself over there by yourself. They have to get bodies and with ever growing liberal anti-military mindset it's getting harder and harder to find them.
     
  11. FDC

    FDC

    219
    0
    Apr 9, 2006
    This is a tough one without sounding like I'm bashing one component or the other.

    Other than the obvious differences I think you'll find an overall better trained combat force in the active Army. This can be seen to some extent overseas when certain active units take over an area that a National Guard unit has controlled. The active unit tends to get out of the gate a bit quicker than the average NG unit. One exception to this was the 155th Brigade out of Mississippi, they did a damn good job in SEVERAL tough AOs during their tour.
    This is not saying the active unit is better, it is usually better prepared. The guard/reserve unit can come with a different skill set that definitely helps them in their various AOs. Looking at the backgrounds of your guard guys, you'll see cops, carpenters, electricians, etc. If we think that doesn't give them a leg up in certain AOs we are sadly mistaken. Look at Civil Affairs Soldiers. A vast majority of them are Army Reservists who deploy more than active duty guys.
    These differences will obviously vary with the mission of the unit. Nobody really cares what an aviation unit does outside the wire, because they normally don't go there. As long as they can fly-who cares whether they are guard or active.
    As far as general day to day military standards go, the active side generally has the advantage here. Reason being, they are doing PT/squeezing in a uniforms every day. Reserve components tend to SOMETIMES overlook basic military things such as weight/fitness if that person can do a job well.
    I know that was a rambling post, I'll put it into english if you need me to;) .
     
  12. FDC

    FDC

    219
    0
    Apr 9, 2006
    Did ya get lost when you got off the yacht, Chief?:tongueout:


    In the navy
    Yes, you can sail the seven seas
    In the navy
    Yes, you can put your mind at ease
    In the navy
    Come on now, people, make a stand
    In the navy, in the navy
    Can't you see we need a hand
    In the navy
    Come on, protect the motherland
    In the navy
    Come on and join your fellow man
    In the navy
    Come on people, and make a stand
    In the navy, in the navy, in the navy (in the navy)
     
  13. LBTRS

    LBTRS NRA Patron Life

    85
    0
    Dec 12, 2004
    Goodyear, AZ
    I'll second that...going on my 8th year in the recruiting business. Anyone that has done this job will understand how hard it is to find "qualified" applicants for any military service.
     
  14. The standards will only be lowered if the NCO allows the standards to be lowered. Here at the school house the guide lines are strict to ensure you are not abusing the Soldier but you still can correct a Soldier. I do it on a daily bases.
     
  15. IDC

    IDC

    37
    0
    Jun 21, 2004
    USA
    Age And Treachery Will Always Overcome Youth And Skill

    ;)
     
  16. Not to piss on anybody's fence, but unless the policy has changed, the Army only accepts pilots off of the street. Inter-service transfers to the warrant officer program apply to all specialties except for aviation. I am active Coast Guard and have been toiling over the same decision myself for the last 3 years. You can get all of the information and applications on the Army's web site.
     
  17. army_eod

    army_eod

    651
    27
    Jan 14, 2005
    PA
    In WWII we were drafting anybody who could walk up to a certain age (40?).

    The Army will now take you up to age 42. Here is the solution: Draft.

    Either start the draft (with NO deferments) or continue with the volunteer force. With the volunteer force we are lowering standards and increasing bonuses.

    That is a fact, Jack. I have been in the game for 24 years. Yeah, I am an old geezer, but I can kick your ass.
     
  18. RENEA

    RENEA Black Rifle guy

    756
    0
    Mar 9, 2005
    Iraq
    If we had a draft this war would have been finished by now.

     
  19. JT-Hickman

    JT-Hickman

    9
    0
    Jan 6, 2007
    Indy, IN
    Urban, let me give you a little something to chew on.

    I spent ten years on active duty 86-96 and have been out just over eleven. My body got beat up pretty well during those ten years, as I have arthritis in my feet, knees and shoulders. I have to get epidurals twice a year to numb a nerve just to make life bearable.

    I'm also 80 pounds overweight...but I can still run 4 miles without stopping and can still shoot with the best of them...

    I'm working out daily so qualify to serve in the Reserves so I can help, if needed.

    wtf does it matter what one looks like in uniform if they can make a difference? Would you want me guarding your back... or a draftee?

    Goes back to the saying... don't judge a book...