To some extent, I think they’ve backed off of this because of several reasons:
the increased use and much better accuracy of psychological testing to “weed out” people that are unstable before they ever get in the service
Having a much better crop of people to pick from: you are getting the people that WANT to be there, and can choose from among the best of these
the realization that hazing and abusing troops doesn’t necessarily toughen them up as much as sometimes messing them up. So there is less outright emphasis on abusing them, and far more on performance demands, making sure you can cut it in complex tasks, and so on. There’s more time and expertise that can go into weeding people out AFTER boot camp
The training soldiers get AFTER boot camp is much more professionalized.
That said, boot camps don’t have to outright abuse or scare anyone so deeply as they do show the recruits that they are going to have to make do and be tough and professional in stressful situations.
You might think boot camps are more “pussy,” but I’m not sure there’s any evidence that modern troops are any more “pussy” for it. Again, the military is far more professional these days. You’re not as much throwing a bunch of kids out there with guns unprepared for what’s ahead. There’s all kinds of simulation and testing and training that prepares them, and schools them more expertly in how to act and react.
Speaking from knowing many military friends…“in writing” means nothing from a recruiter. Once signed up, your recruiter has zero ability to direct or enforce their promises. Anyone saying to their CO “but my recruiter promised that…” will get a rousing gale of laughter, especially if they claim to have a signed promise. Recruiters know this, and it is blatant deception that they can claim to have any control over where you will work in service.
ROTC folks have slightly more control over their final assignment, and by slight I mean effectively none. The few friends I’ve had that did get their first choice of assignment did so by either being stellar top-of-their-class on tests and scores, or by knowing a higher-up that could pull strings and favors for them.
When I enlisted, the recruiter didn’t sign anything related to my rate. The classifer at MEPS put the actual Rate in writing. Maybe that’s what should be said instead of “Get the recriuter to put in wriitng”.?
Today’s kinder gentler boot camp promotes nearly 10% (9%) of its grads to advanced training that are at risk for PTSD. After combat 11 to 17%. Compared to 15% in post Vietnam vets, many draftees. This approach is an improvement?
At the same time nurturing a culture of fear to report psychological symptoms. I see the don’t ask don’t tell policy has expanded to the we’re not going to ask and you’re not going to tell us if you’re combat ready policy.
It’s always been a no-no to abuse a trainee on the books. My DSs were hardened war vets themselves. Boot camp was a joke to them compared to what many of them had already been through. They covered each other’s backs, while doing the best they could to prepare the new meat for whatever lie ahead.
Thankfully, what lie ahead for me was seven and a half years of peacetime active duty.
Speaking as a Personnelman (retired PN1), “in writing” simply means that the individual who’s enlisting signs a contract with a statement that all promises made to him are those that are actually in writing on the contract. It’s up to the individual whether he signs that contract or not. Sign it and he’s enlisted; don’t sign it and he’s not in the military.
But the base legal office does have the authority to examine the recruit’s claims that any promises made to him in writing on that enlistment contract have been breached. That is actually one of the legitimate means of leaving the military prior to the completion of one’s enlistment: breach of contract.
Unless, of course, they just so happen to have that in writing on their enlistment contract–as I did when I enlisted into the Navy.
Hokum. The recruiters have control over which program into which they enlist a person. Again, if that program is a guarantee in writing on the enlistment contract, then the recruit’s going to that program.
Why don’t you ask those friends if you can examine their contracts? You just might be surprised by what you see.
Take the boy camping for a good 2 weeks or so. If possible, once in the middle of summer and once in the middle of winter. Good old roughing it, without the benefit of a shower, camp grill, or ice chest. Getting a buzz cut and firing a grenade launcher sound really cool until you have to sit down with an ass-rash and eat a cold dinner.
The is a bit off topic, but Bear, I couldn’t disagree with you more. We were in Vietnam from 1964 until 1973, and had 500,000 over there in '68, and over 8 million total (half of what we had for WWII). What more do expect for a war that was meaningless to American security? You want more effort? To what end? We were fighting millions of vietcong who were never going to quit until we left.
Vietnam was lost by the South Vietnamese government and by the Johnson Administration, not the public. Our mistake was supporting a corrupt regime in a country that just wanted to be left alone. **Hell, even the architect for the war (Robert Macnamara) realized it was a mistake in 1967! ** Even Nixon knew we had to get out in 1968! Vietnam was a huge folly. Quit blaming war protestors!
Same with Iraq. This is America. We have a right to protest when our country is doing something wrong. If you dont want the public throwing in the towel, then dont start shitty wars like this. Iraq is a huge blunder. Even arch-conservative Pat Buchanan thinks so.
DOH… sorry… was thinking of the Film Making of a Marine (here )
I haven’t read Making of the Corps, and can’t comment on it… though the flim Making of a Marine… as I said before was a pretty honest look (guess I missed Making the Corps… looks like it came out a few years after the film Making of a Marine… sorry for the confusion)
I’ll echo what others have said - have him look into the other branches. One poster made a good suggestion regarding the ASVAB - it will give your son a good idea of what his strengths/weaknesses are and it can be used to give him some idea which branch fits best with his sskill sets.
I’m biased towards the Air Force (Logisics Plans Officer - 1987 to 1992) and there are some career fields where having an Air Force background/training can pay-off well in the civilian world (I’m thinking primarily in Avionics - technicians can earn a pretty good salary after only serving 4 years in service). The Navy is also a good choice in this regards as well in providing excellent training/preparation for some (technical) fields in the civilian world.
The marines are also a good choice, but only if one wants to make a career of it. Based on anecdotal evidence, the marines isn’t necesarily the best choice if one is looking to acquire skills that are transferable (in some fashion) to the private sector.
In short, I wouldn’t disuade your son from joining the military. But letting him know that he has a range of options available to him will, at least, give him a better idea of what he wants from joining the military.
As with any branch… it is based more on type of job (MOS in the USMC), than in branch… the Marines are ‘different’ though; and not everyone would like being one…
My son (now 24) served in the Marine from Sep 9/11/00 to Feb 05. He enlisted infantry, of course having no idea that war would break out exactly one year after his enlistment. He did one tour in Afghanistan and two tours in Iraq. For his second tour in Iraq, he voluntarily extended his enlistment to go back, and did many others in his battalion who were scheduled for release.
He had an outstanding experience. He was a B student in HS, and is now a straight A student in college (not an intellectual, he just learned discipline and pride in his work). He made Sergeant and led other Marines in combat twice; his self confidence and sense of self are strong.
My son did not learn a skill, but learned (as did I), life long life skills.
Boot camp is not what it used to be (I was in the Marines from 73-76 and saw and experienced brutality). My son did not report any brutality. The Marines is tough, though, and if you go infantry, you will have to be very tough.
My nephew joined recently – again, a kid with little direction, sense of self. He is in a support unit for Helicopters, and just deployed to Okinawa. The Marines are giving him a transitional identity – I don’t think he will stay in, but he has tremendous pride of self and pride of service. Boot camp was tough but not brutal, and his training for his occupational speciality was thorough. He had a new sense of confidence of purpose about him when I saw before he shipped out.
I am in my early 50’s, and I can honestly say that my Marine Corps experience is one of the best things I ever did for myself. I know there are former Marines out there who did not benefit from their service, but I have not met one personally. Every Marine I have met is proud of the time in service, and know that it contributed to their later successes in life.
Seems everyone who has served (and many of us during a war)… don’t have the same opinion of SERVING that those who have not do…
Perhaps just have your son talk to some ‘former’ [insert branch he is intersted in here] … doesn’t matter if they just got out… or were in during WWII… you should get some good information and opinions from them (they have no vested interest in leading you astray… those still in get ‘promotion points’ for recruiting efforts)
Making the Corps is a book. Follow the link.