Unfit to Serve, 75% of Young Americans

Off Topic
81

[quote]HolyMacaroni wrote:
Mad_Duck wrote:

You laugh, but I’ll bet you don’t walk around base talking about MMF.

I originally started this post with “Could you imagine HM’s unit?” then realized what a faux pas that would be.

come on now, how do you think i motivate my troops on a PT run?

“goddamit private, if you don’t hurry the hell up you’re gonna be on MMF duty tonight”

“who’s going to be the female sir?”

“Spc. Jones over there is gonna tuck it in for a little bit, don’t worry, you’ll barely notice the diffence”

damn if that kid doesn’t take off sprinting[/quote]

LOL LOL LOL LOL…

82

[quote]dennis3k wrote:
Tex Ag wrote:
Latest report, 75% of Us citizens those between ages 17-24 do not meet the basic requirements to serve in the armed forces. Why? Unfit - either obese or just not physically able, lack a high school degree, or have had problems with the law.

Sad state of affairs

Not to change the subject but is there a large high school drop out rate in the US? I’m just curious as a friend of mine is a teacher in Northern Alberta and she was saying there’s a 40% drop out rate for aged kids 15 and above…so basically once they figure they can go make money working grunt jobs in the oil patch, they quit school. Before hearing this I had always thought people had enough common sense to at least finish high school.
[/quote]

I am not sure of the overall numbers, but I have read several articles on how school districts cook their books so that drop out rates appear far lower than they are in reality. Some urban areas will report 50% drop out rates that are actually closer to 75%. Remember, school funding is based on enrollment.

Some reading for you.

83

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
You can blame the top brass for this. They want to have high standards on an underdisreable job, and they’re moral judgements are just insane.

If you have been treated for depression, or any other mental disorder in your youth, then kiss enlistment good bye, yet if you were a gangster crip 44ing homeys and raping women, as long as you didn’t get to caught for too much, COME RIGHT IN.

The NEW values of society are incongruent with those held by the army, in our own school system mental illness is basically encouraged if not required, there are places where you have to be screened for ADD and if you get diagnosed on their ‘test,’ it is considered abuse for your parents to refuse you treatment. The whole pharma industry is so deep in our system that in this generation and the next, I’ll be a suprised if 90% of young men are ineligible just because of that.

We need to do something, soon, big time.[/quote]

I remember back when you had the option to go to war if you did something stupid like criminal activities. Hey they still have that.

84

There’s alot of spoiled-child school refusal, or just dummy paris hiltion get my ged mentality that goes on in wealthier public districts, in working class ones alot of ppl are from labor culture so they go off to grunt as there is no desire for formal education, and in the poor districts the schools are locally funded (as everywhere) so many of them are so fucked up socially, and underfunded economically that they basically are just a formalized introduction to gangviolence and drugs, so many people get sucked into that and forget about school.

This being said, that’s the negative viewpoint on school, there are also people who actively participate in school and make the most of it. I don’t know what the graduation rate is, but HS is generally considered a joke anyways, many people ‘drop out’ just to go to Community College early where education is more serious and they can get a running start.

85

[quote] Matt wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
Out of curiosity, what do you have to be able to do to sign up?
(Not planning on it, just curious if I’d be in the 75%)

Been many moons since I was in, but if I remember to get into the Marine Corps you had to do 1 pullup, run 1.5 miles in I think 30 minutes and can’t remember the situps. All easy shit. No felonies and must have a HS diploma.

All of which are waiverable.
[/quote]

I think the minimum pullups now is 3, the minimum 3 mile run time is 28 minutes, and the minimum crunches is like 40. If you get the bear minumums on everything you’ll still fail on a point basis. If you’re too heavy for your height you get bodyfat tested, and if it’s too high then you don’t qualify.

86

[quote]Deorum wrote:
well since your not flaunting a flase bravado like the first “blow everything the fuck up” guy was, ill join this discussion. keeping this specific to afghanastan, fighting an unrestrained war would make absolutely no sense.

god this is opening a huge can of worms first id challenge anyone to tell me exactly why we are in afghanastan. if the answer is “bin ladin killed our people” then id like to ask you why you think that.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/

the initial reports dont exactly read that way. because a tape comes around with a binladin looking man claiming responsibilty we are ready to go to war with a nation? im sorry but i never bought this.

9/11 did not receive the type of formal investigation it should have to give full respect to the lives lost. instead all the metal from the planes and from the buildings were collected and promptly melted down. fucking bizaare investigation to bring peace to our fallen heros huh?

still im going to assume our government has no secret agenda and everything is as they tell us (mother fucking lusitania anybody?). we ALREADY REMOVED THE FUCKING TALIBAN. what else do you want? at this point you know who is blowing themselves up in the streets? CIVILIANS WHO ARE FUCKING TIRED OF US IN THEIR COUNTRY.

if another nation invaded my beloved america(a fucking pain we know NOTHING of) id be killing all the fucking invaders i could. we took out the taliban we should be gone. because they are still resisting does not mean there is any more war to be fought. at this point we are merely sustaining a war with NO clear purpose.

why aren’t we fighting an unrestrained war? THERE IS NO FUCKING ENEMY. who is the enemy in afghanastan? some mother fucker in a car waiting to blow us up? thats hardly a standing army. we are done in afghanistan, its over.

my sincerest apologies to any soldiers or families of soldiers i might have just offended. i know you all love our country and so do i. im just asking questions that not many others are willing to ask.

not an asshole just a little confused.[/quote]

You know what, to be completely honest Deorum you’re a fucking asshole.

I’m not going to argue the point about the 9/11 investigation. You’ve got Charlie Sheen on your side, and there’s no way to win an argument against Charlie Sheen and the series of brilliant, well-educated intellectuals who agree with him.

As for Afghanistan, the United States military is confident that the leaders of Al-Queda, who were behind 9-11 attacks, are currently somewhere in Northern Pakistan. Hillary Clinton is too, and when those two forces can agree on something, let no man rend asunder.

Point being, the reason we’re in Afghanistan right now is to protect the fledgeling democracy they’ve got going on. It’s not colonialism, and the people blowing shit up aren’t just sick and tired and not gonna take it anymore. They typically have ties to terrorist organizations, and are trying to attack people while they do things like gather for temple and vote.

I’ll agree that we’re not fighting a war in Afghanistan anymore; Instead, the US military is attempting to create a level of peace and safety by sheer overwhelming force of numbers. Sometimes the Afghani’s help this. Sometimes not.

To the larger point, I think the reason the civilized world doesn’t fight ‘unrestrained wars’ is because we hold ourselves to a highers standard. We don’t hold less developed countries to the same standards, because… they’re less developed. It’s paternalistic and unfair, and that’s life.

87

haha well that was an intelligent response. im not familiar with the charlie sheen references so ill ignore them. as for my argument on 9/11 i gave you facts and you did not dispute them. next point.

im going to assume your not trying your hand at humor and are serious. would you please give me the evidence pointing to Al-Queda being responsible for 9/11. then would you please identify Al-Queda for me. if this Al-Queda i hear so much about but on which find little evidence includes Mr Hussein than i think little bush would have to disagree.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/168/36445.html

so would big cheney.

o really? so what your saying is we are in afghanistan to promote our ideas and agendas? mhm that justifies a war.

o i see this argument is like a relativism argument. since they are attacking our soldiers, we should station more soldiers, making their attacks relatively smaller and less significant. can’t argue with you there.

so your larger point is we hold our selves to higher standards? tell that too japan.

here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was(or tonkin bay). that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none?

the idea that we went to Afghanistan as a RESPONSE to 9/11 is a complete FALLACY.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/preplanned.html

there is a nice compilation of facts regarding this issue. can the response this time be intellectual and contain facts and articles?

88

No, no, never, sir.

Wink-wink, nudge-nudge.

89

[quote]Deorum wrote:
haha well that was an intelligent response. im not familiar with the charlie sheen references so ill ignore them. as for my argument on 9/11 i gave you facts and you did not dispute them. next point.

As for Afghanistan, the United States military is confident that the leaders of Al-Queda, who were behind 9-11 attacks, are currently somewhere in Northern Pakistan.

im going to assume your not trying your hand at humor and are serious. would you please give me the evidence pointing to Al-Queda being responsible for 9/11. then would you please identify Al-Queda for me. if this Al-Queda i hear so much about but on which find little evidence includes Mr Hussein than i think little bush would have to disagree.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/168/36445.html

so would big cheney.

Point being, the reason we’re in Afghanistan right now is to protect the fledgeling democracy they’ve got going on.

o really? so what your saying is we are in afghanistan to promote our ideas and agendas? mhm that justifies a war.

Instead, the US military is attempting to create a level of peace and safety by sheer overwhelming force of numbers. Sometimes the Afghani’s help this. Sometimes not.

o i see this argument is like a relativism argument. since they are attacking our soldiers, we should station more soldiers, making their attacks relatively smaller and less significant. can’t argue with you there.

To the larger point, I think the reason the civilized world doesn’t fight ‘unrestrained wars’ is because we hold ourselves to a highers standard.

so your larger point is we hold our selves to higher standards? tell that too japan.

here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was. that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none?

the idea that we went to Afghanistan as a RESPONSE to 9/11 is a complete FALLACY.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/preplanned.html

there is a nice compilation of facts regarding this issue. can the response this time be intellectual and contain facts and articles?[/quote]

Aw, cute. We have ourselves a little conspiracy theorist :smiley:

90

conspiracy or not i have yet to present anytype of theory. just stating facts and asking questions. also the fact that you used the term “conspiracy theorist” leads me to believe you are extremely closed minded and label anything outside of what you have been spoon fed the ideas and nonsense of radicals. how about you use that brain and think for youself. im astonished at how little people there are in this world who are able to truely think freely ignoring the masses and coming to conclusions without group think.

also there was a question i specifically asked anyone responding to that post to answer.

91

I bet you’ve seen “Loose Change” dozens of times, right?

92

never seen nor have i even heard of that. you dont have an intelligent argument, leave the discussion.

93

Well golly, Mr. Clever, I’m sorry.

Fine, I’ll actually humor you (for some reason… I’m bad with taking bait). You post some claims and some links that are, after looking through them with even a little bit of brain power in tow, complete bullshit. In particular, that last link caught my eye. Typos and quotes that don’t prove what the article is trying to say (unless you bend their meanings in your own head). In general, it presents information that doesn’t show either of the following scenarios: That the U.S. was sitting around hopefully waiting for Osama-backed terrorists to attack us so we could retaliate, or that our government flat out attacked us themselves and made it look like terrorists. That second line of thought is what the mindless “Loose Change” video was about. It’s very popular, especially amongst conspiracy lovers like you, so I just assumed that you had seen it.

I suggest that you go watch it, it’s very interesting. It will give you some interesting new conspiracies to talk about.

But afterwards, go here—> There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons. <— It will explain to you why it was retarded to believe the video that you just watched. It pokes fun at it in a nonfactual manner, but then has more informational links at the bottom.

94

[quote]HolyMacaroni wrote:
Genocide_General wrote:

I agree with you on that. The military needs to access someone on an individual basis, not “Oh you did this in your youth? Go fuck yourself.”

I know tons of guys who got in a little trouble back in their childhood days and they can’t join now because of it. And these are really good guys now. They lightened up on tattoos because they realize everyone and their grandma has one. So they need to rethink their moral requirements, because in this generation it’s pretty much the norm that we all made a dumb mistake as children, or we went through some fucked up ordeal.

x2 man.[/quote]

Unless I’m wrong they have become more strict on tattoos in recent years. My SgtMaj took a picture of the tattoo on my left arm for my record books because the Corps considers it a half sleeve, which is no longer allowed. I didn’t have it when I joined, but it wasn’t an issue when I got it.

Just speaking for the Corps I don’t think they should lighten up on the moral requirements to join. I’ll let the other branches speak for themselves, but the more diluted the Corps becomes, so to speak, removes that “something” that makes Marines different and better than most other countries troops.

95

[quote]Mettahl wrote:
Well golly, Mr. Clever, I’m sorry.

Fine, I’ll actually humor you (for some reason… I’m bad with taking bait). You post some claims and some links that are, after looking through them with even a little bit of brain power in tow, complete bullshit. In particular, that last link caught my eye. Typos and quotes that don’t prove what the article is trying to say (unless you bend their meanings in your own head). In general, it presents information that doesn’t show either of the following scenarios: That the U.S. was sitting around hopefully waiting for Osama-backed terrorists to attack us so we could retaliate, or that our government flat out attacked us themselves and made it look like terrorists. That second line of thought is what the mindless “Loose Change” video was about. It’s very popular, especially amongst conspiracy lovers like you, so I just assumed that you had seen it.

I suggest that you go watch it, it’s very interesting. It will give you some interesting new conspiracies to talk about.

But afterwards, go here—> There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons. <— It will explain to you why it was retarded to believe the video that you just watched. It pokes fun at it in a nonfactual manner, but then has more informational links at the bottom.[/quote]

humor me? the fucking irony. do you even know what an intelligent argument is? your still not presenting anytype of counter argument AT ALL. what you did do is question the credibility of my sources. cnn and globalpolicy.org not credible… with quotes from the president and vice pesident. GOOD LUCK POKING HOLES IN THOSE SOURCES! as for the last one if its such a bad source (and its citations are so bad) than actually DISPUTING the facts like an INTELLIGENT argument normally does shouldn’t be hard for you.

India Reacts - American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JUNE 2001.

BBC - American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JULY 2001.

MSNBC - Afghanistan war plans were on Bush’s desk on 9/9/2001

goddamn bbc and msnbc with their uncredible sources. refute the facts i presented and actually come up with an argument beyond “typos, conspiracies, loose change o my”

o and stop getting your dick hard to this goddamn loose change film. still didnt see it and you trying desperately to interject it into my argument as some sort of crediblity killer is pathetic and would be irrelavant even if i did worship the film - you still seem to lack the ablity to dispute the facts i stated and cited.

96

[quote]Deorum wrote:
here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was(or tonkin bay). that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none? [/quote]

don’t forget to answer this in your next “i have no evidence or facts but im sure your wrong” post.

97

[quote]Deorum wrote:
Deorum wrote:
here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was(or tonkin bay). that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none?

don’t forget to answer this in your next “i have no evidence or facts but im sure your wrong” post.

[/quote]

Stop posting and go eat a cheeseburger.

98

[quote]Deorum wrote:
Deorum wrote:
here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was(or tonkin bay). that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none?

don’t forget to answer this in your next “i have no evidence or facts but im sure your wrong” post.

[/quote]

And pull up your goddamn pants.

99

[quote]buffalokilla wrote:
Deorum wrote:
Deorum wrote:
here is a question i want whoever might respond to me to include an answer to - is it possible 9/11 was used much in the same way the sinking of the luisitania was(or tonkin bay). that is to garner support for a war that would otherwise have none?

don’t forget to answer this in your next “i have no evidence or facts but im sure your wrong” post.

And pull up your goddamn pants.[/quote]

haha i normally wear i belt, i didnt think a photo for a bodybuilding site would be subject to fasion criticism. sorry my fasion sense isnt approved by yourself. feel free to pm me any more of your fasion tips, as long as they dont include skinny jeans.

the cheeseburger sounds good though, you be sure to eat one aswell.

100

[quote]Deorum wrote:

haha i normally wear i belt, i didnt think a photo for a bodybuilding site would be subject to fasion criticism. sorry my fasion sense isnt approved by yourself. feel free to pm me any more of your fasion tips, as long as they dont include skinny jeans.

the cheeseburger sounds good though, you be sure to eat one aswell.

[/quote]

you’re like a goddamn child. it’s annoying