Better soldiers are ready to sign up

americanthinker.com ^ | Frank Friday

[RoosterRedux]

Our military, especially the Army, is already in deep trouble because of the low quality of recruits. Now the Army has a foolish new policy of enlisting even more mentally challenged soldiers. It’s already terribly expensive to find qualified soldiers. We spend a staggering amount of money on TV commercials and other recruiting efforts. Yet, bringing in more men who are likely to wash out is not going to fix anything. It just makes it all the more expensive. Bring back the draft? Hardly; there is no political will for this and the modern military needs enlisted men who can serve at least 10 years. That’s when they really achieve the skills to run today’s high-tech systems. The typical two-year draftee is only learning his soldier’s craft when his enlistment would be over.

There is a solution though, if we could take a page from our military’s glorious past -- bring back the Philippine Scouts! The Scouts were the most famous of the many hundreds of thousands of Filipinos who served in U.S. military units as late as the 1970s. During the intra-war period, they were considered America’s most elite infantrymen. These were not the ordinary territorial militias or police, or resident aliens enlisted from the U.S. Rather, these were in-country Filipinos who for most of the 20th Century could join directly into Regular Army battalions based in the Far East, or serve as sailors on U.S. Navy ships. The last Filipino Army enlistments ended with WWII, but the Navy continued to recruit until 1976, when Jimmy Carter ended the policy.

[RoosterRedux]

Not sure what to think of this, but it is a interesting idea.

[Macoozie]

Really?
Have you been to the Fils lately?
The Makati Kids won’t do a damn thing to save themselves.

How about mandatory service for ALL at 18?
How about paying enough to make it a real career choice?
How about teaching civics, patriotism and real American History?

Our America is worth fighting for.
“Politics is downstream from culture”, so start the fight to reclaim a culture that supports and honors our military.

[momincombatboots]

A lot has changed.. whomever thought this up fails to acknowledge the regional changing demographics. Sounds like a great idea, if you want piles of body bags from workplace violence.
I am torn on this, I know the armed forces need to get lean and focused. Numbers matter for a lot of important reasons. It is beyond insanity to have druggies and folks with psych problems to weigh down the good soldiers we have. They are and will be dead weight, but with the improvement in the economy and job market, this was likely to happen.

[posterchild]

I don’t know specifically about the US Army but if any institution tends to get filled up with, as the author contends, ‘low quality of recruits’ and ‘mentally challenged’ then it becomes a much less appealing career choice for those who do not fit into those categories.

I have a hard time getting excited about any plan which requires foreign nationals when we have 330 million citizens and various others here.

[BradyLS]

Were I Army Chief of Staff, I’d sooner take a recruiting shortfall, knowing I had good people to make good soldiers, than make my numbers knowing even more money and resources will be lost cleaning up the inevitable messes they’ll make and harm they’ll do.

[antidisestablishment]

How about having a military that isn’t run by generals who think troops should spend more time worry about coddling perverts than killing enemies?

The military isn’t going to fix years of spiritual decline. America is no longer great because she is no longer good. Her children are raised by TV and social media and we wonder why they’re screwed up?

[BradyLS]

That is, I wouldn’t want to meet quotas by taking problem cases off the streets.

I agree with other posters that the services should be made to be attractive careers on their own. Draw in the people you need or can train. Don’t take anything less.

[Vlad The Inhaler]

Why should the mentally deranged be allowed to become congressmen and senators and governors and mayors and lawyers and college professors
but not be allowed to become privates in the army?

It’s not as if they would abuse their access to military grade weapons any more than people like sergeant Nidal Hasan or major Hasan K. Akbar - is it?

/s

[Rashputin]

This is a typical bureaucratic, "kick the can down the road" solution. Taking in people who already have problems is just a way for one faction to get their atta' boy now while downstream the VA will deal with a much higher percentage of vets with problems.

The VA has a history of sweeping vets under the rug and stomping on any lumps in the rug who squirm along with wasting taxpayer money on all sorts of things rather than spending it on caring for vets. People who from day one are known to have problems just leads to more of the same, in spades.

[AustinBill]

This is why the military is turning increasingly to robots. Unfortunately, the moral rot that necessitates this move will be programming / directing them, with predictable consequences.

Klaatu, Barada, Nikto

[chrisser]

How about paying enough to make it a real career choice?

This.

I looked at the military several times in my career for varying reasons.

In high school, with just a part time job, was the only time it made financial sense.

Once you have even the smallest degree of success toward just about any non-military career, the military quickly becomes a significant pay cut. The more successful you are, the larger the financial cost to serve.

In my case, I didn't feel the call to serve until I was a few years out of college and established in my career. By then, I had a mortgage and a car, neither of which I could get out from under easily. I couldn't afford the pay cut.

It's one of the reasons I have a deep appreciation for the sacrifices our military make just in the act of enlistment.

[Alberta's Child]

The first step in getting excellent recruits into the military is to fix the military, period.

It should come as no surprise that the U.S. military has a hard time finding good recruits when it has become nothing more than a global mercenary force for foreign interests who own our government.

If the U.S. Army were being used to defend our southern border instead of building and propping up Islamic nations I'll bet they'd be turning away volunteers.

[DariusBane]

Good men are available but won’t serve under the globalists and social warriors that infest.. Trump is only 8 years. It will take generations to delouse the military. The selection system no longer mertit based has filled the Pentagon with usless people.

[Little Pig]

A better idea would be to raise the enlistment age restriction, and revise the guidelines for assigning veterans who re-join. Right now, former military who go back in get shunted into either their old MOS (if there’s an opening) or into a last-chance MOS like Infantry or Cook.

Now, most guys in their early 40s might not be able to run-and-gun like the young bucks, but they can take a slot in a less-demanding MOS so a younger guy/gal can be put somewhere where their youthful energy can be more effectively employed. This also brings experienced and willing soldiers into MOS’s that currently attract a lot of layabouts and leeches looking for cake jobs. These older soldiers would likely be able to bring in useful skills like management, technical abilities, and perspective. They’d know and understand the “why” behind the way the military does things, so they’d be less likely to become intransigent. Imagine bringing someone who has operations and logistics experience into the Supply company, or experienced businesspeople into the Personnel units, or skilled IT workers into the cyberwarfare units. Things are going to start running a little more smoothly. These “re-treads” might be able to serve for ten years or more before they get too old to perform effectively. While they’re in, they can also support the leadership-track NCOs by mentoring younger soldiers and helping those who decide to transition out rather than re-enlist.

If officers (admittedly, mostly flag-grade) can stay in until their 50s, why not find ways to let seasoned vets come back, even if for a little while?

[binreadin]

“That is, I wouldn't’t want to meet quotas by taking problem cases off the streets.”

Some of the best military people I have known enlisted after being found guilty of a crime and given the choice to join the military by a judge. On the other hand, talked to a marine officer recruiter a few years ago who inducted 12 men into Quantico, and of those 12, only the two who had required waivers passed the initial training course.

These days they are disqualifying people for BS reasons—a lot of these young people would be just fine if they were led properly.

[BwanaNdege]

This is 2015 - the latest data I could find.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/612742/dod-announces-recruiting-retention-numbers-through-june-2015/

WASHINGTON, Aug. 4, 2015 — The active-duty Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force met or exceeded their fiscal year-to-date 2015 accession goals through June 2015, Defense Department officials announced today.

The active-duty Army missed its goal by 4,696, officials said.

Here are the active-component recruiting numbers for fiscal year 2015 through June 2015:

— Army: 38,918 accessions, 89.2 percent of its goal of 43,614;

— Navy: 25,380 accessions, 100.0 percent of its goal of 25,380;

— Marine Corps: 21,025 accessions, 100.1 percent of its goal of 21,005; and

— Air Force: 17,495 accessions, 100.1 percent of its goal of 17,480.

The Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps exhibited strong retention numbers for the ninth month of fiscal year 2015.

Five of the six reserve components met or exceeded their fiscal year-to-date accession goals through June 2015. The Army National Guard missed its goal by 3,527. All six of the reserve components met or exceeded the DoD quality benchmarks.

Here are the reserve-component accession numbers for fiscal year 2015 through June 2015:

— Army National Guard: 32,654 accessions, 90.3 percent of its goal of 36,181;

— Army Reserve: 20,897 accessions, 100.6 percent of its goal of 20,773;

— Navy Reserve: 4,042 accessions, 100.0 percent of its goal of 4,042;

— Marine Corps Reserve: 5,995 accessions, 100.9 percent of its goal of 5,941;

— Air National Guard: 6,810 accessions, 100.0 percent of its goal of 6,810; and

— Air Force Reserve: 5,213 accessions, 104.4 percent of its goal of 4,994.

[arthurus]

The most rational and useful system that is, however no longer possible to implement in our culture, would be a universal male only draft effective within 6 months of a set birthday between 16 and 18. The Selectivwe Service organization would not be a part of the active military and the draft would be for 6 months, perhaps only 3 months and would consist of Basic and Advanced Infantry Training. There would be NO posting to any duty station during that time. Draftees would then be released and permitted to enlist after a defined interval, between one month and a year.

The result would be that military service would not be some exotic disruption of life but would be a normal stage to manhood. The military would have no dearth of enlistees, even in wartime because the rich kids and the college bound would not fear thatthe "draft" would retard their social and economic progress and most of all, the military life would be familiar and not outside of the "real world." Voluntary training could be offered universally to women that would train them in the use of personal firearms and self defense tactics for one to three month. Additional training such as is given in the military now would be life-saving training that would impart medic abilities to everyone.

[Chickensoup]

I don’t understand what is going on. I know great young men who are set aside and not taken into the military, kids I have known since childhood. Perhaps they are needing a certain ratio of white to black recruits???

[mbynack]

I don’t know specifically about the US Army but if any institution tends to get filled up with, as the author contends, ‘low quality of recruits’ and ‘mentally challenged’ then it becomes a much less appealing career choice for those who do not fit into those categories.

I was in the AF at the end of Vietnam and supervised a lot of these types. They joined the AF to keep from getting drafted and going to Vietnam. They didn't want to be there and it was a full time job just keeping them at work.

The new warfighting systems are much more complex than they were 40 or 50 years ago and it takes someone with an average IQ or above to operate and maintain them.

The Navy took in a lot of folks as a Democratic social experiment and made them Non-Rated. They weren't assigned to a specific career field. They spent their time painting and working as an assistant in the mess hall. One of the problems this created was that once a guy has been in for 5 or 10 years, there's no slots to promote them to. They aren't skilled enough to supervise anything and they can't get promoted.

[A Navy Vet]

"The most rational and useful system that is, however no longer possible to implement in our culture, would be a universal male only draft effective within 6 months of a set birthday between 16 and 18. The Selectivwe Service organization would not be a part of the active military and the draft would be for 6 or 3 months? Draftees would then be released and permitted to enlist after a defined interval?, between one month and a year."

I hope the above is not your idea, because it is the most unworkable idea I've ever heard. Male only? 16? New bureacracy between Selective Service and active military? 6 month draft, with 3 months Boot camp AND Advanced Infantry Training? No on post/ship duty station for real life training/experience? Draftees discharge after 6 months then permitted to enlist between one month and a year? Sure they'll be standing in line.

What about the technical training in all branches that sometimes take up to a year or more? Due respect, the above is unworkable. The above would be a waste of money and time.

I may go for a Reserve or National Guard draft but at 16? and a 3 month draft? That's not enough time to learn to turn individuals into cohesive team nor get in shape nor learn the very basics of combat or Navy seamanship. Hell, my first 3 months was just learning how to march in unison and square away my bunk. What nonsense.