# Want your Kid To Be "ARMYSTRONG"? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 16, 2007, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867 "2007-08-16T22:48:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/41 "2007-08-17T11:45:50Z")
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan] I suppose that as far as shitty jobs go, right now, trying to develop an ad campaign for the armed forces has got to be near the top. [/quote] Just because it sucks is no reason to come up with insultingly bad slogans. > [@](#): > > The military _desperately_ needs people because of what’s going on in Iraq, but because of what’s going on in Iraq, few people want to join. And yet, the Army is _meeting_ recruiting goals. I can remember _extensive_ stretches in _peace_ where the Army was _failing_ to meet goal… And I mean for _years_. Back when I was On The Bag (Clinton years), the Army was _desperate_. So… Hmmm. Why _is_ that? Frankly, I suspect that it’s a combination of patriotism (yes, it still exists, and in large quantities), adventure, some seriously LARGE signing bonuses, and a lot of very hard work by individual recruiters. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/42 "2007-08-17T13:12:09Z")
[QUOTE=Tranquilis] The Army operates the same as the other services in this regard: If you don’t meet the cutoff, you don’t go, pending a waiver. Waivers are NOT the standard mode of operation. The _vast_ majority the soldiers _are_ the target demographic. Those whom are not are very close to it, and are in some other way sufficiently impressive to generate a waiver. [/QUOTE] And yet, in a recent N_ew York Times_ article, I read: “While soldiers with criminal histories made up only 11.7 percent of the Army recruits in 2006…” Those recruits all got waivers. Throw in another 4,000, give or take, who got medical waivers, and you’re close to a quarter of all new Army recruits getting waivers of one kind of another. (Cite [here](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/14/us/14military.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5088&en=06c953182b1c51bb&ex=1329109200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)). Then factor in that the Army has lowered the aptitude scores needed to get in, and you begin to get the picture. I read in the esteemed _USA Today_ the following: “In a written statement, the Army said good test scores do not necessarily equate to quality soldiers. Test-taking ability, the Army said, does not measure loyalty, duty, honor, integrity or courage.” In other words, they’re not even pretending any more. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/43 "2007-08-17T13:26:07Z")
Actually, my math is a little wonky in that post. It’s not a quarter of all Army recruits who get waivers – actually closer to 1 in 6. But the point still stands. ---
**Author:** ![Missy2U](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3bc359/32.png) [@Missy2U](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Missy2U)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/44 "2007-08-17T13:35:58Z")
**Tranquilis** , as the parent of a son who is currently working with the Navy recruiter in planning out his future college plans and career, thank you from the bottom of my heart for your comments. I’m finding some of the elitist (and completely uninformed) comments in this thread pretty revolting myself. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/45 "2007-08-17T13:51:09Z")
My favorite line of the Army Strong commercials is the stregnth to get over yourself Basic is so therapeudic. STill better than the old "We do more by 9 AM than most people do all day’ line. I don’t even like to be up by 9 AM! ---
**Author:** ![DudleyGarrett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DudleyGarrett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DudleyGarrett)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/46 "2007-08-17T13:56:08Z")
[QUOTE=Biggirl] Don’t say things like that. It demoralizes our troops. [/QUOTE] Unless you’ve been or are a troop, don’t assume you know this. What demoralizes the troops isn’t the public at home, it’s the shitty officers above them that make them work 16 hour days for months on end. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/47 "2007-08-17T16:05:05Z")
[QUOTE=DudleyGarrett] Unless you’ve been or are a troop, don’t assume you know this. What demoralizes the troops isn’t the public at home, it’s the shitty officers above them that make them work 16 hour days for months on end. [/QUOTE] What demoralized us was cold food, cold showers, and cold women. A nice 24 hour leave, hot chow and a decent water heater did wonders for our attitude. That and when the LT brought steaks out one night. ---
**Author:** ![DudleyGarrett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DudleyGarrett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DudleyGarrett)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/48 "2007-08-17T16:12:54Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] What demoralized us was cold food, cold showers, and cold women. A nice 24 hour leave, hot chow and a decent water heater did wonders for our attitude. That and when the LT brought steaks out one night. [/QUOTE] Yeah, that too. Out LT was never so nice. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/49 "2007-08-17T16:15:48Z")
[QUOTE=Tranquilis] And yet, the Army is _meeting_ recruiting goals. I can remember _extensive_ stretches in _peace_ where the Army was _failing_ to meet goal… And I mean for _years_. Back when I was On The Bag (Clinton years), the Army was _desperate_. So… Hmmm. Why _is_ that? Frankly, I suspect that it’s a combination of patriotism (yes, it still exists, and in large quantities), adventure, some seriously LARGE signing bonuses, and a lot of very hard work by individual recruiters. [/QUOTE] My understanding is that not only have they lowered standards (and raised enlistment age, you can now join the **regular** Army at age 42) is that they’ve _dropped_ the quota levels, so while they might be meeting goal, they’re _not_ attracting new recruits in the numbers they need to maintain the force at projected strength levels. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/50 "2007-08-17T16:25:49Z")
[QUOTE=Sal Ammoniac] And yet, in a recent N_ew York Times_ article, I read: “While soldiers with criminal histories made up only 11.7 percent of the Army recruits in 2006…” Those recruits all got waivers. Throw in another 4,000, give or take, who got medical waivers, and you’re close to a quarter of all new Army recruits getting waivers of one kind of another. (Cite [here](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/14/us/14military.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5088&en=06c953182b1c51bb&ex=1329109200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)). [/quote] Yup. And they all had damned good reasons, too. Do _you_ know what kind of things they were getting waivered? **I** do, and I’ll bet you a sixpack you have no _fucking_ idea, or you’d have not bothered trotting that out. Criminal records I’ve seen waived: Drunk Driving (one instance only, with _extremely_ extenuating circumstances). Sexual misconduct - 15 year old kid got his 15 year old girlfriend preggers, girl’s mom pressed charges and got him convicted as sex offender - Never mind that they’d turned around and gotten married, and he was doing _right_ by his family. Speeding and other moving violations - LOTS of waivers for these crimes, provided there no patterns of extended misconduct (too many speeding tickets can indeed dis-qual you). _Minor_ drug possession, _without_ intent to distribute can sometimes be waived, depending on circumstances. And so on and so forth. Those 11.7% with ‘criminal’ records? By and large, they’re the stuff of normal every day life, the same kinds of fucks-up that kids and adults of _every_ stripe are subject to… Hell, even the President’s _daughter_ has a criminal record. Desperadoes, these recruits are _not_. Simple, and _blindingly_ obvious fact you’ve utterly and completely missed: Armed services reflect the society they’re raised from. Ask around… how many of your neighbors have a 'sheet? More than you suspect. > [@](#): > > Then factor in that the Army has lowered the aptitude scores needed to get in, and you begin to get the picture. I have the picture. You, apparently, do not though. Yeah, they lowered them - to allow a _waiver_ down to AFQT as low as of 26 _in special circumstances_, down from the 31 it’s always been (and still is, barring a waiver). Even then, no more than 4% of the force can be from Category 4 applicants, whilst 60% of the force must be from Cats 1-3A. Wow! What a plummet. Not. > [@](#): > > I read in the esteemed _USA Today_ the following: “In a written statement, the Army said good test scores do not necessarily equate to quality soldiers. Test-taking ability, the Army said, does not measure loyalty, duty, honor, integrity or courage.” This is an _absolutely_ correct statement. I had a kid working for me, an E-3 by the name of Carangi, who was simply not bright. He was one of those despised Cat 4s that everyone assumes are being taken advantage of. But by _god_ he was a damned good sailor! He got more done than any two other people in the shop, with two exceptions. He busted his ass, he followed direction, he didn’t need supervision, and when he was in doubt, he came and _asked_. give me a shop full of Carangies, and I’ll move the world. People like him are not doomed to slave wages - They get trades, and they’ll _earn_ a good living - with the service, or without it. Go ahead - sneer at the absolute _fact_ that tests do _not_ measure the man. Sneer at the fact that the Army _knows_ this. I’ll be busy _sneering_ at your ignorance. [QUOTE=Tuckerfan] My understanding is that not only have they lowered standards (and raised enlistment age, you can now join the **regular** Army at age 42) is that they’ve _dropped_ the quota levels, so while they might be meeting goal, they’re _not_ attracting new recruits in the numbers they need to maintain the force at projected strength levels. [/QUOTE] See above, IRT the test scores. Quota levels dropping are not a sign of lies, incompetence, or any other such crap. quota levels are set at the services _projected replacement needs._ IOW, when the Army expects to need fewer bodies, it _recruits_ fewer bodies. The recruitment machine is not on autopilot - the throttles are adjusted as needed. If the quotas are down, it’s because the _need_ is down. IOW, retention is _up_ or the Army is projecting a need for fewer soldiers. Age 42 was indeed put in place to aid recruitment, but mostly for the ability to regain soldiers with prior service. Do you _really_ think the recruiters are out there hauling in bussloads of middle-aged men? Nope - but they _do_ prize former service, when they can get them. ---
**Author:** ![Potato\_Pancakes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/65b543/32.png) [@Potato\_Pancakes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Potato_Pancakes)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/51 "2007-08-17T16:34:38Z")
Nope. I want them to be CIVILIANSOFT. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/52 "2007-08-17T16:35:15Z")
Out of edit window: Oh, and the medical waivers? Busted bones, mostly. Some other items, on a similar level. One of my favorite questions to ask potential applicants was about their “busted bones, bolt, pins, plates, and screws.” I’d rattle it off as almost one long word, and it very rarely failed to break tension, usually getting a laugh. But sometimes they _did_ have bolts, pins, plates, and screws. Then it’s “get the medical records, and the X-rays, and let’s go see if you’re waiverable.” Mild scoliosis is also _sometimes_ waiverable, as is ritalin use before age 12, _childhood_ asthma (if currently and provably resolved) and so on. The recuriters ain’t fillin’ up the ranks with cripples - A soldier _still_ needs to be able to be a grunt, no matter how smart they may otherwise be. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/53 "2007-08-17T16:40:26Z")
[QUOTE=Tranquilis] Yup. And they all had damned good reasons, too. Do _you_ know what kind of things they were getting waivered? **I** do, and I’ll bet you a sixpack you have no _fucking_ idea, or you’d have not bothered trotting that out. [/QUOTE] Well, according to the article, the kinds of things getting waivered include aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide. If you want to claim most of the waivers are for trivial things, fine, but the military probably had good reasons in the past for excluding those people, and is now being forced to sing a different tune. In any event, your earlier claim that “the _vast_ majority” of soldiers meet the target demographic is untrue, if we assume that if you need a waiver, you’re not in the target demographic. To put it bluntly, the Army is letting in more people than ever who are criminal, stupid, or unfit. This has been well documented in the media. Are you denying it’s true? ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/54 "2007-08-17T17:14:56Z")
[QUOTE=Sal Ammoniac] Well, according to the article, the kinds of things getting waivered include aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide. If you want to claim most of the waivers are for trivial things, fine, but the military probably had good reasons in the past for excluding those people, and is now being forced to sing a different tune. [/quote] I waivered a guy accused of murder, once. It was his cousin, not him, but the waiver package was _still_ abuot six inches thick. But that’s anecdote, as is what you’re recounting. Give me some numbers. I’ll bet you that sixpack again that the items you listed are 1) _seriously_ rare, and 2) fully and completely justified. > [@](#): > > In any event, your earlier claim that “the _vast_ majority” of soldiers meet the target demographic is untrue, if we assume that if you need a waiver, you’re not in the target demographic. If you _assume_ you need a waiver, eh? I assume no such thing. Waivers are exceptions, by definition. If they weren’t, they’d not be called waivers. _Presuming_ the media’s numbers to be accurate, and in this case they are, roughly speaking, 75% of the applicants need no medical waivers. Yeah, I call that a vast majority. 88.3% have a _spotless_ background. Yup, I’d call _that_ a vast majority, too. Even if we assume that _no_ waivers overlap (an utterly bullshit assumption - I’ve _been_ there), we’re still talking nearly 2/3 whom have never had any serious medical issue in their lives, and have never crossed the law in any way. Further, when we consider that the _vast_ majoity of waivers are for non-disqualifying issues, Yeah, I’ll stand by my position; it’s rock-solid. The services don’t expect that every good kid will have _not_ broken a bone, or have _not_ ever made a mistake. They’re _still_ the target demgraphic, there’s simply a higher burden of _proof_ that they’re qualified. Nothing more, nothing less. Your continued inability to understand this indicates that you simply cannot grasp that. Seeing as you’re _not_ (aparently) stupid, I’ll have to assume that your inability is, at this time, deliberate, and that you’re _so_ wedded to your world view that I could physically rub your nose in the facts, and you’d still deny them. I think you and I are done, on this subject - You won’t learn, and I won’t bother trying to correct your ignorance any more. Beleive what you want to - your familiar world view is safe from me. > [@](#): > > To put it bluntly, the Army is letting in more people than ever who are criminal, stupid, or unfit. This has been well documented in the media. Are you denying it’s true? See above. ---
**Author:** ![Omegaman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/e480ec/32.png) [@Omegaman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omegaman)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/55 "2007-08-17T17:17:13Z")
[QUOTE=Algher] What demoralized us was cold food, cold showers, and cold women. A nice 24 hour leave, hot chow and a decent water heater did wonders for our attitude. That and when the LT brought steaks out one night. [/QUOTE] Peace be with all of you guys. If it was up to me you would be eating steak every night. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/56 "2007-08-17T17:21:03Z")
[QUOTE=Tranquilis] ritalin use before age 12 [/QUOTE] Age twelve? The way that stuff’s handed out these days, they could pick up a lot of recruits by increasing the limit to 16. Why 12? ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/57 "2007-08-17T17:22:00Z")
Dunno why age 12. It’s in the CRUITMAN, that’s the rule. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/58 "2007-08-17T17:25:59Z")
[QUOTE=Omegaman] Peace be with all of you guys. If it was up to me you would be eating steak every night. [/QUOTE] At your Mom’s house. After a full day of training and preparing for a war that, due to the wisdom of your elders, never comes. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/59 "2007-08-17T17:28:29Z")
Someone needs a dose of reality…and it ain’t me: [Army Lowers Bar for Recruits](http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,78111,00.html) [US lowers standards in army numbers crisis](http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1499164,00.html) [The Army Is Taking Chances On Recruits With Rap Sheets](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/30/eveningnews/main3115199.shtml) [Strained military lowers bar for dropouts](http://www.eveningsun.com/localnews/ci_6612117) [Lower standards help Army meet recruiting goal](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-09-army-recruiting_x.htm) [Out of jail, into the Army](http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/02/02/waivers/index_np.html) [GI SchmoHow low can Army recruiters go?](http://www.slate.com/id/2133908/) [Nick Turse on 12-Pentagon Steps to a Misfit Military](http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/121072/nick_turse_on_12_pentagon_steps_to_a_misfit_military) **Then again, you also have the “illegal Mexican” pool:** [Immigration bill offers a military path to US dream](http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/06/16/immigration_bill_offers_a_military_path_to_us_dream/) [As Recruitment Numbers Fall, U.S. Army Looking Toward Illegals](http://www.jbs.org/node/4479/print) [Immigration bill proposal: Join military, become legal](http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070617/news_1n17dream.html) [Risk, rewards in military duty for illegal aliens](http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/08/13/navarette.opinion/index.html?eref=rss_topstories) [Illegal Immigrants: Uncle Sam Wants You](http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3271/illegal_immigrants_uncle_sam_wants_you/) [Noncitizen soldiers: the quandaries of foreign-born troops](http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0705/p01s03-usmi.html) ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2007, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867/60 "2007-08-17T17:41:54Z")
[QUOTE=Tranquilis] …we’re still talking nearly 2/3 whom have never had any serious medical issue in their lives, and have never crossed the law in any way. [/QUOTE] _You_ may consider 2/3 to be a “vast majority,” but I’m not sure anyone else does. As to the numbers you’re looking for, in 2006, the Army granted over 6,000 waivers for “serious misdemeanors.” Serious misdemeanors include minor drug offenses, but also domestic violence and drunk driving. They granted over 800 waivers for felonies. And the point is that these numbers have gone way up in recent years – they’re over twice is high as they were in 2004. Hence my point, which you’ve done nothing to refute: the Army is taking in a certain percentage of soldiers who before would have been rejected out of hand as too criminal, too unfit, or too stupid – not in the “target demographic,” in other words. The situation in Iraq has posed a recruiting challenge for the Army, which they’ve responded to be lowering the bar. I’m not even sure why you’re challenging that; it seems like a bit of a commonplace to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/want-your-kid-to-be-armystrong/415867.md?page=4)