It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Duty, Honor, Country

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:01 PM
I thought a high school education was required to join the military...

When did that change? Why?

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:29 PM
You have always been able to get in with a GED.

You used to be able to work towards it once in as well, but I don't believe that is the case anymore.


posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:47 PM
I was a military wife for 22 years, and I disagree with the opening statement, even back 25 years ago many of the people that joined the military did it for reasons of financial needs, to get money for free education, bonuses and other reasons as to escape personal issues at home.

The elite part of the military the officers program is not really the well off American sons and daughters right now.

Yes you may find some . . . specially the ones that have attended military schools with the goal of becoming officers once they graduate because family ties to the military.

This group separate themselves from the other officers programs they believe themselves above.

I spend 2 years working at the officer’s academy in Quantico Virginia and they are the cream of the cream.

Many of them will join because the military offers great programs under officer careers for young people that otherwise will not be able to afford higher education.

The military has his own way to segregate their military population depending your military rank and status you are to be with others in your same category they are Enlisted, None commissioned officers, Warren Officers ( previous enlisted becoming officers) and Officers.

Right now the military has lowered their standards a lot when it comes to age and education before you needed high school diploma to join, then it was a GED with some college, now a GED is enough.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:47 PM
Doesn't GED=High School Education?

They're obviously taking people who haven't received a high school education or equivalency now. Ten percent by the data you showed. My question is when did they start accepting people without a HS education OR equivalency? And why?

Never mind, I know the answers. My point is that they've lowered the educational standards to join. Which I don't have a problem with, but it used to be that 100% of military recruits had HS or GED. It was a requirement. Now, apparently, it's not.

I'm just trying to point out some of the points that your data from the Defense Department neglects to mention.

The age requirement has also been drastically raised, especially in the Army.

How many other requirements have been waived or lowered in the past 5 years to insure meeting recruitment goals? (Which btw have also been lowered)

I'm glad you're proud of the military, but I'm really quite sick of being told that if I don't feel the same way you do about our military that I have no concept of serving my country. That somehow the fact that you've been in the military gives you a special status from which to judge anyone who disagrees with you about the holiness of the US military.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:59 PM
BH some of the standards lowered are,

Categories, the rate the tests into categories that means test scores now are accepted in level 4 when that was not even thinkable, is like a D in a school test that will be like a 30 from of a test of 99 and sometimes depending how low is the quota they will accept a score of 15.

Before was a 2 as minimum it was raised in 2005.

The weight limit has increased also due to the fact that American people has gotten wider.

Also criminal records, now they are taking misdemeanor offenses, drug or alcohol related violations or medical records.

This is becoming a bit of a problem when the candidates can not meet the training programs.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 08:40 PM
Hate to shoot your conspiracy in the foot, but what your postulating is simply not true. And easily proven so.

More than 30 years of research indicates that enlistees who are high school graduates are much more likely than non-graduates to complete their first term of enlistment (80 percent versus 50 percent).[Footnote 29] In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Services gave high school graduates, including those with alternative education credentials, higher priority for enlistment. In the mid- to late 1970s, the Army, Navy, and Air Force classified GED holders and high school graduates differently because evidence showed that persons with GED certification experienced higher first-term attrition. Today, in all Services, applicants with GEDs need higher AFQT scores to enlist than do high school diploma graduates. In fact, the Services strive to meet a 90 percent Tier 1 benchmark established by Defense Planning Guidance.
Educational Credentials. DoD implemented a three-tier classification of education credentials in 1987. The three tiers are:

* Tier 1—Regular high school graduates, adult diploma holders, and non-graduates with at least 15 hours of college credit.
* Tier 2—Alternative credential holders, including those with a General Education Development (GED) certificate of high school equivalency.
* Tier 3—Those with no education credential.

The system was developed after research indicated a strong relationship between education credentials and successful completion of the first term of military service.[Footnote 10] Current research continues to show that education attainment of youth predicts first-term military attrition.[Footnote 11] In conjunction with the National Academy of Sciences, the Defense Department developed a mathematical model that links recruit quality and recruiting resources to job performance.[Footnote 12] The model was then used to establish the recruit quality benchmarks now specified in Defense Planning Guidance. Service programs are required to ensure that a minimum of 90 percent of non-prior service (NPS) recruits are high school diploma graduates. At least 60 percent of recruits must be drawn from AFQT Categories I-IIIA; no more than 4 percent of the recruits can come from Category IV. This DoD policy does not prohibit the Services from setting their own targets above these benchmarks. These benchmarks were set by examining the relationship between costs associated with recruiting, training, attrition, and retention using as a standard the performance level obtained by the reference cohort of 1990, the cohort that served in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. Thus, these benchmarks reflect the recruit quality levels necessary to minimize personnel and training costs while maintaining Desert Shield/Desert Storm cohort performance.[Footnote 13]

Also, this from 1963

‘The military must insist upon a respect for duty and a discipline without counterpart in civilian life,’ in order to prepare for and perform its vital role.... The essence of the military service ‘is the subordination of the desires and interests of the individual to the needs of the service.’ The history of the courts deferring to the judgment of military leaders on matters affecting the Armed Forces is one of the most consistently upheld principles of constitutional law. Furthermore, serving in the military is a privilege and sometimes an obligation, conferring neither the right to serve nor the right to avoid service... (see Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez 372 U.S. 144 (1963))

There is a lot more info in that link, it clearly describes the entry requirements in regards to criminal offenses and how the military handles them.

Some of the crimes that can keep you out of the army are larceny, assault, rape, drug related and murder. Obviously the more violent the crime, the more serious the crime, the less likely the military is to overlook it. Some minor crimes may be overlooked if significant time has passed since you were convicted and have since had no other felonies. Still, this day and age it's highly unlikely you'll be able to join up, the Army is very picky about recruits and wants the best candidates they can get.

A waiver is required for any applicant who has received a conviction or other adverse disposition for a serious criminal misconduct offense. The waiver approval authority is the Commanding General of the Army Recruiting Command. I should mention here that while waivers are "technically" possible, serious criminal conduct convictions or other adverse dispositions are rarely waived. Applicants will incur a 6-month wait from date of conviction prior to waiver

So perhaps the Military is NOT full of fat, stupid, criminals.

Perhaps they are brave young men and women wanting to serve their country.

I have not in anyway indicated that there are not those of you out there that have a "bad taste" in your mouths for the military. Your posts all prove that there are some at least. What I have provided is very simply the facts and figures that show the average young man and woman are stepping up to the plate to serve. KNOWING full well that we are at war. You can call them stupid, call them fat, even call them criminals; I choose to call them heros.


posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 09:00 PM

Originally posted by semperfortis
You can call them stupid, call them fat, even call them criminals; I choose to call them heros.

I know you're not refering to me here because I have done no such things. I'm just trying to check out the facts in the face of the romanticism that is sometimes displayed when refering to the US Military.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 09:07 PM

I know you better than that.

That was an extempore statement.


posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 09:23 PM

Originally posted by semperfortis
And I am PROUD, Proud of my Country, and PROUD of my fellow soldiers.

Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence.
IMO soldiers are persons who lacks imagination and have rigid thought patterns.
But that's just me.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 10:20 PM

I also Wants to know who you are refering when it comes to your statement.

If you don't mind

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 10:42 PM
Ahh.. right wing political correctness, don't you just love it.

Too caught up in the offensive to realise they invented it.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 10:45 PM
The Broad Brush

Originally posted by yanchek
Pride is a poor substitute for intelligence.
IMO soldiers are persons who lacks imagination and have rigid thought patterns.
But that's just me.

I'm an American veteran, so does that mean I lack imagination and have rigid thought patterns?

It seems to me such a description would more accurately apply to those who equate prejudice with truth.

posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 11:50 PM
Yeah Majic,

We are in some good company.

Jefferson, Washington, McArthur, Alexander, Roosevelt, Nimitz, Puller, Murphy, Well you get the idea.

Now who is "yanchek?" I believe I would MUCH rather be one of the aforementioned unimaginative, unintelligent, prideful people with rigid thought patterns than "Yanchek" anyday.

And for those that believe that my previous post was directed at anyone in particular, read your post and if you indicated the military is becoming "stupid, fat or full of criminals" then perhaps it was directed at you. If you never intended that, then no it was not.

SHEEESH people wake up!! Maybe, just maybe the hundreds of thousands of people that believe in the Military might just be right and the handful of you wrong? What are the odds........


posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 12:50 AM
You know there will come a time in the future, (it could be the near future or far future) when humanity will begin to know more about their true nature and that of reality, that they all are one and part of the same entity. Differences will be reconciled, no wars will be fought, so there will be no need for military due to the obvious pervasive thought at that time that hurting other people would also mean that you're hurting yourself; even if it is in defence. When we reach that point in time, we will have evolved to the next level.

I guess that certain ancient civilisations have known this before, because they knew and understood the golden rule. But obviously that has gotten lost.

posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 01:31 AM
Not so much lost Bandit, as those civilizations were all conquered by the ones that did not cater to the pacifist viewpoint.

Oh it's a wonderful ideal, just not practical anytime in the near future.


posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Majic
I'm an American veteran, so does that mean I lack imagination and have rigid thought patterns?

Like you said. You were a soldier. Now your not anymore.

Originally posted by semperfortis Now who is "yanchek?" I believe I would MUCH rather be one of the aforementioned unimaginative, unintelligent, prideful people with rigid thought patterns than "Yanchek" anyday.

Brilliant! You just made my day.

[edit on 13-8-2006 by yanchek]

posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 09:46 AM
Thank you, Thank you

Semper takes a bow

I am from the Government and here to help...


posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 11:50 AM

I will say one last thing, from the wife of a retired Marine that is still very proud to serve his country. . . even my husband thinks that the military is changing to much due to pressing needs.

In his last days of been active duty all ready many rules were bend and slackened even he was concern of what the military is to become.

That is all for now.

posted on Aug, 13 2006 @ 12:39 PM
Oh I agree with SOME of that Marg.

The institution of "Stress" cards in the Marines about did it for me. I mean what kind of Pansy needs a stress card in basic?

I'm guessing they wont have them in combat. At least they didn't when I was there.

This still does not in anyway diminish the dedication, devotion and HONOR the young men and women are showing by enlisting.

A BIG HOOORAH to your Husband!!!!


posted on Aug, 15 2006 @ 11:29 AM
Here is some Words for all War SuperFans:

"If it's natural to kill, why do men have to go into training to learn to do it?"
Joan Baez

DUTY, n. A concept of slaves, a tool of tyrants. Doing what other people want you to do because they want you to do it. (to paraphrase Oscar Wilde)
Chaz Bufe

"Patriotism in its simplest, clearest, and most indubitable meaning is nothing but an instrument for the attainment of the government's ambitious and mercenary aims, and a renunciation of human dignity, common sense, and conscience by the governed, and a slavish submission to those who hold power. That is what is really preached wherever patriotism is championed. Patriotism is slavery."
Leo Tolstoy

"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificually induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear."
General Douglas MacArthur

Enjoy the Rest of Your War-Mongering-Thread.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in