Big changes to grueling SF course draw scrutiny

[Peter1469]

Big changes to grueling SF course draw scrutiny

I think this is a bad move. The Army is talking about lowering standards for special forces, graduating more, and relying on the receiving unit to provide more training.

Deep in the dark North Carolina woods, a small white light flickers in the heavy underbrush. It's after midnight and a soldier is taking a risk by turning on his headlamp to find his way.

The overnight land navigation test is just one hurdle in the grueling, months long course to join the Army's elite Special Forces, and using the light violates the rules. Just the night before, at least 20 commando hopefuls had either committed a disqualifying failure or given up in the drenching rain.

Read the rest at the link.

[Tahuyaman]

Big changes to grueling SF course draw scrutiny

I think this is a bad move. The Army is talking about lowering standards for special forces, graduating more, and relying on the receiving unit to provide more training.


Read the rest at the link.

I agree that lowering the standards is dangerous. The Q course wasn't as demanding as it should be anyway. Standards were weakened in the past for various reasons and they shouldn't be watered down any more.

[Peter1469]

I agree that lowering the standards is dangerous. The Q course wasn't as demanding as it should be anyway. Standards were weakened in the past for various reasons and they shouldn't be watered down any more.

It is two-fold. Needing more people to deal with our forever wars. And the need to get women into the field.

[Tahuyaman]

It is two-fold. Needing more people to deal with our forever wars. And the need to get women into the field.

Well, we don't "need" women in Special Forces and we can disengage from all these areas where US national interests aren't involved.


It's an odd thing. When I was in the Army, I welcomed the deployments. I wanted to be part of the force which eneacted American foreign policy. Now? Not so much.

[Common]

I believe what were not being told is that there is a general all around recruitment problem. I wouldnt be surprised if after the 2020 election the talk doesnt start about reviving the draft.

I read an article that millenials dont show as much interest in the military and the generation after is expected to be worse.
Its a dilemna that only reinstating the draft eventually can fix and id bet that theres many that refuse to go, thats just a personal feeling.

[MMC]

Leftists will do everything they can to weaken our Military.

[Agent Zero]

Well, we don't "need" women in Special Forces and we can disengage from all these areas where US national interests aren't involved.


It's an odd thing. When I was in the Army, I welcomed the deployments. I wanted to be part of the force which eneacted American foreign policy. Now? Not so much.

What about the women who want to go into Special Forces?

[Agent Zero]

Leftists will do everything they can to weaken our Military.

Please explain to the women of this forum how they "weaken our military".

[The Xl]

Lowering standards is always a bad idea, almost always motivated by politics instead of practicality, logic, and efficiency.

[Agent Zero]

Lowering standards is always a bad idea, almost always motivated by politics instead of practicality, logic, and efficiency.

Like Trump has done?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...hortage-351365

Fat, unhealthy Americans threaten Trump’s defense surge

Rising obesity numbers, drug use, criminal backgrounds and other problems mean most people at prime military recruiting age are ineligible to serve.

By BRYAN BENDER
02/19/2018 12:31 PM EST

Nearly three-quarters of Americans age 17 to 24 are ineligible for the military due to obesity, other health problems, criminal backgrounds or lack of education, according to government data. | Jeff Haynes/AFP/


Continue to article contentCrime and drugs are also a major impediment. Studies have shown that criminal histories prevent one of every 10 young adults from being able to join the military.But health problems are the clearest impediment to military service — especially the alarming number of youngsters who are overweight.
"We need to increase physical fitness and better eating habits in schools," said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Norm Seip, chairman of the Council for a Strong America, "and not get on that obesity scale that is going in the wrong direction."
The council is a bipartisan foundation made up of former law enforcement leaders, retired military officers, business executives, pastors and prominent coaches and athletes "who promote solutions that ensure our next generation of Americans will be citizen-ready."
One possible solution to ease the recruiting challenge would be for the military to lower its standards for entry.
"There have been efforts to look at whether you need to change basic training to accommodate the fact you have soldiers coming in that are going to take more time to develop into what you want them to be," said David Johnson, a retired Army colonel who is now a researcher at the government-funded Rand Corp. "If the physical quality is not what you want you are going to have to build that in."
He also suggested that some people with criminal backgrounds could be allowed to serve if their offenses were minor and if a determination is made that they got onto a better path.
"What is a bad apple?" he asked. "Is it habitual behavior? Does what they did when they were 14 really matter when they are 19 or 20?"
But others say lowering standards poses its own risks to national security.
"The Army learned a painful lesson in 2009," Spoehr said. "We lowered the standards, we signed more waivers for people who had acts of criminality than we usually did. We paid the price. These people we let in eventually caused misconduct, were separated for dishonorable reasons more than normal soldiers. The last place that we would go is to mess with the standards."