Military age young people

[PWC]

Just heard a terrible statistic (last week) from FOX: 71% of the nations military age "persons" are inegible due to weight, can't pass the test (too stupid), and medically or legally disqualified. And of the remaining 29%, only 4% could be considered eligible for "elite" force assignment.

I suspect this number, 71%, is flipped from VN. I believe most were qualified (disregarding McNamara's Forest Gump experiment), but many ran, or otherwise sought deferment. I know I handed in my draft card in 63 to enter the AF.

During VN, they ran the fat off us. Most wanted to do the best they could on the tests; I suppose some could dummy out, trying to get out of Uncle's service. Medical and legal disqualification (drugs and felons) is usually a result of lifestyle choices: excepting preexisting medical (disease and physical imparement).

[blackhawknj]

They said the same thing in 1940-41. And all I heard during my Army service 1967-1971 was that somehow if we had "better soldiers" we could have avoided so many problems.
Weight ? "More PT, Drill Sergeant !" How about a diet that's something other than 80 % white bread and potatoes. And the worst fatties are usually lifers with beer bellies.
Criminal records ? The problem there is it's hard for recruits who aren't afraid of rough stuff to be bluffed and bullied by officers and NCOs who are.
The pre-Vietnam Army was no paragon of military virtue and efficiency. One veteran who served 1964-1966 told me "I was in the Army for a little over 700 days and I must have been on KP for at least 50 of them." And Guard Duty for another 50. "Can't pass the test " ? How much smarts do you need for Guard Duty, KP, janitorial duties, groundskeeping, etc. I heard a news story, someone complaining that because of the frequent deployments "the grass isn't being cut. ' ?
Elite units ? 50 years ago I went through and completed training for Special Forces-the Green Berets. I had better training in the Boy Scouts. I knew only one NCO who was a gun guy, plenty of drunks and fatsos. We had generals such as Westmoreland, Abrams, Weyand, etc. Nowadays it's David Petraeus, these homos and lesbos and cross-dressers promoted under Obama.
When the Duke of Wellington was show a list of officers the War Office proposed to send him he said:
"I don't know if they frighten the enemy but by God they frighten me."

[Vern Humphrey]

In 1940 when the draft was instituted, the Army had no clear picture of the population. They set high standards, and soon everyone who met those standards was in the Army. As the need for men climbed, the standards had to be lowered again and again. Many of those drafter late in the war were no prizes.

[High Plaines Doug r]

By 1943 the War Dept was concerned enough to commission a WWI infantry officer who was by then a BG to investigate why 1/3 of the recruits/draftees ended up getting "unfit for service discharges" from the military medical/psychiatric DRs before they could further serve in the military. The book is named: "All but Me and Thee" by BG Elliot D. Cooke. Published in 1946, it's a short, good read.
Essentially, the conclusion was that 1/3 of eligible (physically fit) males were unfit morally; 1/3 unfit mentally; and of the remaining 1/3, most made good soldiers until exhausted, chronically or circumstantially poorly lead or suffered what is now known as PTSD from individual or repeated "bad luck".
I don't think those numbers have really changed much but any lack of enthusiasm from the populace isn't going to help.

[remus]

They should take the chubs and work it off of them. They used to do that. Now they won't hire them to start. I question them on this. Most aren't too stupid, they unfortunately have not been taught how to think by our extremely lenient educational system. A lot of them just don't know how to function in life, received participation trophies etc without having to try and win. We're a society of a great many milksops.

[blackhawknj]

The training I and so many others received during the Vietnam Conflict was generally inadequate, the volunteer army-as one NG officer said "They're constantly cutting back on the training."
In WWII there was the conflict between our obligation to shoulder our burden in combat and our mission as the "Arsenal of Democracy". They found-not surprisingly-that young fit males generally made better workers than women. In Germany they found that a 10 hour shift by women was no more productive than an 8 hour shift by men.
Several veterans have told me of recruits in their Basic Training companies who lost LOTS of weight-indeed, one is a member of this forum.

[gpw_42]

There's nothing new about this problem, see the 2010 report below, authored by a group of retired general/flag officers: http://cdn.missionreadiness.org/MR_T...to_Fight-1.pdf The summary states: "Mission: Readiness, an organization of retired senior military leaders, is warning Congress that at least nine million 17- to 24-year-olds in the United States are too fat to serve in the military. That is 27 percent of all young adults. Obesity rates among children and young adults have increased so dramatically that they threaten not only the overall health of America but also the future strength of our military. The group is calling on Congress to take immediate steps to remove junk food and any remaining high-calorie beverages from our schools, noting that these products are major contributors to childhood obesity."

As personnel requirements go up, recruiting/draft standards go down. Period. I personally know of at least one soldier who reported to his first unit in 2005 or 2006 at a whopping 280lbs, AFTER basic/AIT. He was a truck driver before enlisting at age 32-ish, and lost a bunch of weight in the training pipeline. But if you're starting at around 350, that kind of weight doesn't come off in 6 months - which is an example of what generated the report above. The guy stayed on his company commander's "list" until the CDR had a way to pawn him off on another unit, AFTER we arrived in Iraq. Not a bad soldier, otherwise, but he never looked the part, and I think was assigned "inside the wire" duties throughout the deployment. I PCS'd out of the battalion immediately after the deployment, but I'm confident the soldier was chaptered out shortly after we redeployed for being unable to meet weight requirements. I encouraged him to get out and walk/ride a bike/swim on his off-duty time; he talked about problems with his feet/legs.

A friend of mine is a retired West Pointer. Two of her daughters (who are twins, and both slender before enlisting) enlisted in the Guard last year, and were pretty gung-ho; one had huge problems getting through basic due to stress fractures in her legs/feet. The other sailed through with no issues that I know about. There's a point beyond which pushing folks to PT is counter-productive, and this young woman reached it...and I bet the fat guy above reached it as well. Some of these problems (whether male or female) are related to lifelong (among 18-21 y/os) excesses and/or deficiencies in diet and exercise, which combine to create physiologic problems which the military can't overcome with basic training. Sudden-onset PT breaks 'em down and then it takes MONTHS to get them healthy enough to resume training. Vicious cycle.

Here's a link to the Heritage Foundation report which likely generated the Fox News story in the OP:
https://www.heritage.org/defense/rep...e-the-military

[Griff Murphey]

So many of these kids today live through social media and cannot survive without their phone fixes. Kids today don’t fish, hunt or camp, don’t have BB guns. They are hell on screens but not so much on three dimensional stuff. Agree weight and fitness are most important but I think there are a lot of other small things that are creating people much less suited to military service.

Like Gomer Pyle in FMJ I could not do the horizontal ladder but could pass everything else on the Army PFT, grenade threw, low crawl, and mile run. I weighed 165, had a 36” waist and was one of the fattest boys in my high school ‘64-67. Today I think well over half of the boys are well over 200 lbs.

[Sunray]

"...can't pass the test (too stupid)..." That's the education system more than the kid.
"...Kids today don’t fish, hunt or camp, don’t have BB guns..." Neither did the draftees and volunteers of W.W. II or the SEA War Games.
Like High Plaines Doug and blackhawknj say, a lot of the W.W. II guys weren't fit or literate either.
"...eligible for "elite" force assignment..." Way different requirements than regular troopies.
"...he said:..." The Iron Duke said that about his line infantry, not officers. His officers bought their commissions, usually had no military training of any kind and were usually, but not always, second or third sons that would not inherit anything or the sons of the then new middle class looking for social advancement.

[Allen]

Today I think well over half of the boys are well over 200 lbs.

From what I can gather they seem to be proud of that too---they are hoping for a career in football where they can make millions for playing and skating through life.

[m1ashooter]

The facts are the facts. The same statistics were just release in the Retired Officers Magazine. I work with a lot of young people and a few years ago was active with my sons JROTC unit. Parents have allowed the creation of at least a generation of young people who can't qualify for enlistment because of the behavior medicines that the educational systems and doctors have pushed on them. My son is a young Bosuns Mate 3rd Class in the USCG. The USCG has around 40,000 people that apply for around 4500 boot camp positions annually so the standards are very high. Even then you still get young people doing stupid things that get them thrown out.

One of the problems we really face is the nature of conflict in a really big war is there will be no time to build up the forces like we have done in the past. We will have to fight with who we have and what we've got.

[blackhawknj]

Remember too many kids today are growing up fatherless. I did in the 1950s and 60s, back then I was part of the 15 % or so, today I'd be in the majority.
One of the nails in the Carter Administration's coffin was the revelation in the Spring of 1980 that 46 % of the Army's first term enlistees were Cat IVs-the "three hots and a cot crowd".
I remember Jack Anderson wringing his hands, writing how the nations defense had been foisted of on "the poor, the uneducated, the disadvantaged and the desperate". In 1982 it was found that 46 % of the Army's first term RE enlistees were Cat IVs. People I knew who served as junior officers and EM then had few kind things to say about the NCOs they had to put up with, and I have talked to a lot of recent veterans who got fed up with the PCness, the double and triple standards, the favoritism shown to certain groups on today's military.

[Vern Humphrey]

There is no question that AR (Anal Retentiveness, aka Political Correctness) has done enormous damage to the Armed Forces. But from my experience, if we had to land on Omaha Beach or Iwo Jima again, we have the men who could do it.

[Allen]

There is no question that AR (Anal Retentiveness, aka Political Correctness) has done enormous damage to the Armed Forces. But from my experience, if we had to land on Omaha Beach or Iwo Jima again, we have the men who could do it.

I hope you're right. At least we have better weapons now. Perhaps a similar conflict now would be easier to win and with less blood spilled.

[blackhawknj]

"There are no bad soldiers, only bad officers." Napoleon
"There are no bad soldiers, only bad regiments." William Slim
"A competent leader can get efficient service from poor troops, while on the contrary an incapable leader can demoralize the best of troops."
John J. Pershing
The troops I served with 1967-1971 were just as good as this country as ever had, while in WWII if we had had officers such as Calley, Medina, Barker, Henderson, generals such as Westmoreland, Abrams, Weyand, Samuel Koster, Keith Ware....
"Give me iron in the men and I don't worry about the iron in the ships." Farragut