The Briefing Room
General Category => Military/Defense News => Topic started by: rangerrebew on February 16, 2018, 09:48:34 am
-
The Looming National Security Crisis: Young Americans Unable to Serve in the Military
February 13, 2018
Authors: Thomas Spoehr and Bridget Handy
Summary
The military depends on a constant flow of volunteers every year. According to 2017 Pentagon data, 71 percent of young Americans between 17 and 24 are ineligible to serve in the United States military. Put another way: Over 24 million of the 34 million people of that age group cannot join the armed forces—even if they wanted to. This is an alarming situation that threatens the country’s fundamental national security. If only 29 percent of the nation’s young adults are qualified to serve, and if this trend continues, it is inevitable that the U.S. military will suffer from a lack of manpower. A manpower shortage in the United States Armed Forces directly compromises national security.
Key Takeaways
https://www.heritage.org/node/2446867/print-display (https://www.heritage.org/node/2446867/print-display)
-
I got curious about how big a deal this was. We've got 10 million 17-24 year olds who are eligible, and a total military of a little over 2 million. Just how many of those 10 million do we need (assuming we maintain the current demographics)?
So I looked it up.
There are about 850,000 military members under the age of 25. This is 40% of our military (43% of active, 34% of reserves). That means that 2.5% of our population under 25 are serving, or 8.5% of the eligible population under 25.
That 8.5% number was higher than I expected, and seems like a possible concern. There's got to be an upper limit on that number based on those who want to serve, and I was surprised that it was at least 8.5%.
The article did seem suspicious in a couple areas, for example:
Previous criminality prevents one of every 10 young adults from being able to join the Armed Forces—meaning that 3.4 million people who would otherwise make the cut are unable to join.
Well, sort of, as long as you are only counting those who aren't also ineligible for other reasons. I'd bet willing to bet that a lot of those 3.4 million are also ineligible because they also didn't graduate. Those people weren't counted twice in arriving at that 24 million number were they? [It's that "who would otherwise" phrase that bugs me, it belongs on the cause clause, not the effect, IMO].
-
And our kid is still sitting at home almost a year after initiating contact with a recruiter.
An Honor Roll student who was in USAF JROTC in HS, an Eagle Scout and scored high enough on the ASVAB and AFQT to qualify for any enlisted job in USAF. He picked a job where they're desperate for qualified technicians, one that has pretty high SRB's.
Yet, he's been waiting for the bureaucratic idiots at MEPS (who have lost his medical records 3 times in the past 7 months) to decide whether or not he can enlist because of a mild case of intermittent eczema that is treated with OTC products.
It's not just the caliber of the recruits, it's also the caliber of the USG morons who could screw up tearing up a wet paper sack. These "gatekeepers" disqualify many, otherwise qualified recruits because of their incompetence, ineptitude and plain laziness. Our kid was DQ'd without a Dr. even looking at him or his medical records as is required. He had to appeal to the USAF Surgeon General who then lit those idiots up. Conveniently, they lost his records after this and a subsequent time as well. He submits what they ask for, they come back and request additional records, he submits that, they come back again, ad nauseum.
I believe it's a combination of factors that is short changing our military with qualified and able bodied recruits.
-
And our kid is still sitting at home almost a year after initiating contact with a recruiter.
An Honor Roll student who was in USAF JROTC in HS, an Eagle Scout and scored high enough on the ASVAB and AFQT to qualify for any enlisted job in USAF. He picked a job where they're desperate for qualified technicians, one that has pretty high SRB's.
Yet, he's been waiting for the bureaucratic idiots at MEPS (who have lost his medical records 3 times in the past 7 months) to decide whether or not he can enlist because of a mild case of intermittent eczema that is treated with OTC products.
It's not just the caliber of the recruits, it's also the caliber of the USG morons who could screw up tearing up a wet paper sack. These "gatekeepers" disqualify many, otherwise qualified recruits because of their incompetence, ineptitude and plain laziness. Our kid was DQ'd without a Dr. even looking at him or his medical records as is required. He had to appeal to the USAF Surgeon General who then lit those idiots up. Conveniently, they lost his records after this and a subsequent time as well. He submits what they ask for, they come back and request additional records, he submits that, they come back again, ad nauseum.
I believe it's a combination of factors that is short changing our military with qualified and able bodied recruits.
The Army would snatch him up in a heartbeat.
-
And our kid is still sitting at home almost a year after initiating contact with a recruiter.
An Honor Roll student who was in USAF JROTC in HS, an Eagle Scout and scored high enough on the ASVAB and AFQT to qualify for any enlisted job in USAF. He picked a job where they're desperate for qualified technicians, one that has pretty high SRB's.
Yet, he's been waiting for the bureaucratic idiots at MEPS (who have lost his medical records 3 times in the past 7 months) to decide whether or not he can enlist because of a mild case of intermittent eczema that is treated with OTC products.
It's not just the caliber of the recruits, it's also the caliber of the USG morons who could screw up tearing up a wet paper sack. These "gatekeepers" disqualify many, otherwise qualified recruits because of their incompetence, ineptitude and plain laziness. Our kid was DQ'd without a Dr. even looking at him or his medical records as is required. He had to appeal to the USAF Surgeon General who then lit those idiots up. Conveniently, they lost his records after this and a subsequent time as well. He submits what they ask for, they come back and request additional records, he submits that, they come back again, ad nauseum.
I believe it's a combination of factors that is short changing our military with qualified and able bodied recruits.
As in government is inept, incompetent, tooo slow, too costly, etc. Nothing new. The military is no exception.
-
And our kid is still sitting at home almost a year after initiating contact with a recruiter.
An Honor Roll student who was in USAF JROTC in HS, an Eagle Scout and scored high enough on the ASVAB and AFQT to qualify for any enlisted job in USAF. He picked a job where they're desperate for qualified technicians, one that has pretty high SRB's.
Yet, he's been waiting for the bureaucratic idiots at MEPS (who have lost his medical records 3 times in the past 7 months) to decide whether or not he can enlist because of a mild case of intermittent eczema that is treated with OTC products.
It's not just the caliber of the recruits, it's also the caliber of the USG morons who could screw up tearing up a wet paper sack. These "gatekeepers" disqualify many, otherwise qualified recruits because of their incompetence, ineptitude and plain laziness. Our kid was DQ'd without a Dr. even looking at him or his medical records as is required. He had to appeal to the USAF Surgeon General who then lit those idiots up. Conveniently, they lost his records after this and a subsequent time as well. He submits what they ask for, they come back and request additional records, he submits that, they come back again, ad nauseum.
I believe it's a combination of factors that is short changing our military with qualified and able bodied recruits.
My nephew's son spent junior high and his high school years in ROTC and did well, it was always his intention to enlist out of high school. Initially he was a bit overweight and they held him off, so he spent a lot of effort changing habits and getting below weight, then they held him off because of very small non cancerous growth on his neck. Now I do have doubts about my nephew being an officer, but I have no doubt about his intelligence (scored well in testing), physical ability, or desire to serve his country. My nephew and grand nephew are understandably upset.
-
The Army would snatch him up in a heartbeat.
@txradioguy
I've talked to him about it, the Army has a lot of technical career fields that are in line with what he wants to do.
I think he's just hung up on "following dad's footsteps" right now. He just can't grasp that regardless of which service he joins, I'm still proud of his desire to serve. To learn skills not readily available as a civilian and have a path towards a productive and rewarding future.
-
As in government is inept, incompetent, tooo slow, too costly, etc. Nothing new. The military is no exception.
@truth_seeker
I have a tendency to dig deeper than the "average" reporter.
Plus, it doesn't hurt that I'm painfully aware and familiar with how incompetent just about every level and function of USG can be. :patriot:
-
My nephew's son spent junior high and his high school years in ROTC and did well, it was always his intention to enlist out of high school. Initially he was a bit overweight and they held him off, so he spent a lot of effort changing habits and getting below weight, then they held him off because of very small non cancerous growth on his neck. Now I do have doubts about my nephew being an officer, but I have no doubt about his intelligence (scored well in testing), physical ability, or desire to serve his country. My nephew and grand nephew are understandably upset.
@GtHawk
I'm sorry to hear of this. What we learned in our appeals is that if the service accepts a recruit with a known medical condition, they assume the responsibility. I had a USAF Flight Surgeon read this to me out of one of the regulations. That is contradictory to "service connected", but apparently things have changed since I retired. Or maybe it's just selective "interpretation. I wish your nephew's son the best.
-
@GtHawk
I'm sorry to hear of this. What we learned in our appeals is that if the service accepts a recruit with a known medical condition, they assume the responsibility. I had a USAF Flight Surgeon read this to me out of one of the regulations. That is contradictory to "service connected", but apparently things have changed since I retired. Or maybe it's just selective "interpretation. I wish your nephew's son the best.
Thank you. We had discussed the question of the military not wanting to take on a liability, unless of course it's gender modification, and he had documentation from two separate specialists to eliminate that concern. My mother always liked to say everything happens for a reason, after a while I would respond that that was fine I just preferred it be a good reason.
Good luck to you and yours!
@SZonian
-
Thank you. We had discussed the question of the military not wanting to take on a liability, unless of course it's gender modification, and he had documentation from two separate specialists to eliminate that concern. My mother always liked to say everything happens for a reason, after a while I would respond that that was fine I just preferred it be a good reason.
Good luck to you and yours!
@SZonian
:thumbsup:
-
@txradioguy
I've talked to him about it, the Army has a lot of technical career fields that are in line with what he wants to do.
I think he's just hung up on "following dad's footsteps" right now. He just can't grasp that regardless of which service he joins, I'm still proud of his desire to serve. To learn skills not readily available as a civilian and have a path towards a productive and rewarding future.
I get that part. My dad was USAF and my grandfather's were USAAC.
I still followed in their footsteps just wearing Army green instead of Air Force blue.
Tell your son...and this was a big selling point for me...was the Army puts it in writing in your contract you're going to school for (insert MOS here) and not "well we will try to get you into that school but we might have to out you in something similiar if there are no openings" like the AF does.
-
I read on one thread that any pathway to citizenship by immigrants could include a stint in the armed forces.
That is the ONLY way I could ever consider bringing people closer to the head of the line.
-
Just do what George W. Bush did to keep recruitment numbers up during Iraq/Afghanistan: allow violent felons and hand out bundles of cash!
I still find it odd that re-instituting the violent-felon restrictions was one of the very first things Obama did upon coming into office.
-
Just do what George W. Bush did to keep recruitment numbers up during Iraq/Afghanistan: allow violent felons and hand out bundles of cash!
I still find it odd that re-instituting the violent-felon restrictions was one of the very first things Obama did upon coming into office.
Would you kindly provide some support about either of those situations. for those claims, because I don't recall ever hearing either of those policy changes.
I will say this however: If the USA had volunteer military recruiting difficulties during the first years following 9/11/2001 we have a more serious problem, than most will care to ponder.
During WWII ten percent of the 160 million population served in uniform. People volunteered, and people were drafted.
-
Just do what George W. Bush did to keep recruitment numbers up during Iraq/Afghanistan: allow violent felons and hand out bundles of cash!
I still find it odd that re-instituting the violent-felon restrictions was one of the very first things Obama did upon coming into office.
I'm not surprised. It was the first step he took in his 8 year campaign to break the will and the spirit of the military.
And he almost succeeded.
-
I get that part. My dad was USAF and my grandfather's were USAAC.
I still followed in their footsteps just wearing Army green instead of Air Force blue.
Tell your son...and this was a big selling point for me...was the Army puts it in writing in your contract you're going to school for (insert MOS here) and not "well we will try to get you into that school but we might have to out you in something similiar if there are no openings" like the AF does.
@txradioguy
Young man is meeting with the USA recruiter today...
-
@txradioguy
Young man is meeting with the USA recruiter today...
Awesome. If you don't mind let me know how it goes.
-
:thumbsup:
I just heard from my Mother, haven't spoken to my nephew yet, that my grandnephew has been inducted( I think that's right) and is in Boot Camp. I'm happy for him, I still don't think he's Officer material, but I know this has been his goal since Jr. High and is probably the best thing that could happen for him.
I will be thinking good thoughts for your son!
@SZonian
-
Awesome. If you don't mind let me know how it goes.
@txradioguy @GtHawk
He's letting the Army take over his enlistment from the USAF...the Army recruiter suspects that since our son is considered "a Tricare baby", that the USAF recruiter has been ultra-conservative in recruiting him because he doesn't want to get in any trouble if anything medically disqualifying is found after he's been enlisted.
The Army guy is very confident there won't be any problems getting him in and in either UAV or helo maintenance, which is what he wants.
Congrats to your grandnephew GT, God speed to him and family. Our son would have had a chance at a college ROTC slot, but he blew it in 9th grade when he let his math scores slip. He graduated with a cumulative GPA that was 0.02 points under the minimum cutoff. He didn't "get it" when we were talking to him about it then, but when the ROTC folks told him, he "got it". :shrug:
-
@txradioguy @GtHawk
He's letting the Army take over his enlistment from the USAF...the Army recruiter suspects that since our son is considered "a Tricare baby", that the USAF recruiter has been ultra-conservative in recruiting him because he doesn't want to get in any trouble if anything medically disqualifying is found after he's been enlisted.
The Army guy is very confident there won't be any problems getting him in and in either UAV or helo maintenance, which is what he wants.
Congrats to your grandnephew GT, God speed to him and family. Our son would have had a chance at a college ROTC slot, but he blew it in 9th grade when he let his math scores slip. He graduated with a cumulative GPA that was 0.02 points under the minimum cutoff. He didn't "get it" when we were talking to him about it then, but when the ROTC folks told him, he "got it". :shrug:
@SZonian @GtHawk excellent news for both of you.
-
I read on one thread that any pathway to citizenship by immigrants could include a stint in the armed forces.
That is the ONLY way I could ever consider bringing people closer to the head of the line.
My understanding of the Trump position, with a 12 year path to citizenship, was equal to starting out day one, at the back of the line.
e.g. Twelve years is the wait time, for a new applicant.
-
@SZonian @GtHawk excellent news for both of you.
Funny thing is, he could barely contain his excitement when I chatted with him about it before he "committed". Unlike previous times when discussing about the USAF.
I asked him point blank, "After all this time (years) of wanting to be in the USAF, you're changing to the Army in the span of about 30 minutes. Are you sure?" He told me that he had thought and prayed about this before leaving the house to meet with the recruiter today and was sure.
All I could say was I support his decision and wish him the best.
-
Funny thing is, he could barely contain his excitement when I chatted with him about it before he "committed". Unlike previous times when discussing about the USAF.
I asked him point blank, "After all this time (years) of wanting to be in the USAF, you're changing to the Army in the span of about 30 minutes. Are you sure?" He told me that he had thought and prayed about this before leaving the house to meet with the recruiter today and was sure.
All I could say was I support his decision and wish him the best.
That's good to hear. Glad that he gave it some thought and didn't make a knee jerk decision because of a foot dragging USAF recruiter.
I actually talked with a USAF recruiter when I made the decision to come back active duty...decided to stick with the Army because they were making me jump through a thousand hoops and not even guaranteeing I'd get an AFSC I'd already completed at a joint service school during my first stint in the Army...and this was before there was any talk of them sending me to MEPS.
Your son won't be disappointed in the choice he's made I assure you.
-
That's good to hear. Glad that he gave it some thought and didn't make a knee jerk decision because of a foot dragging USAF recruiter.
I actually talked with a USAF recruiter when I made the decision to come back active duty...decided to stick with the Army because they were making me jump through a thousand hoops and not even guaranteeing I'd get an AFSC I'd already completed at a joint service school during my first stint in the Army...and this was before there was any talk of them sending me to MEPS.
Your son won't be disappointed in the choice he's made I assure you.
Yeah, me too.
I'm having a hard time reconciling what the USAF has done to him. Even the Flight Doc and Med Grp Commander at Edwards seemed perplexed when we reached out to them for advice/suggestions.
Oh well, their loss. I will not be kind when I read how the USAF continues to have retention problems, problems finding skilled people to fill technical jobs, etc.
They're their own worst enemy.
-
Yeah, me too.
I'm having a hard time reconciling what the USAF has done to him. Even the Flight Doc and Med Grp Commander at Edwards seemed perplexed when we reached out to them for advice/suggestions.
Oh well, their loss. I will not be kind when I read how the USAF continues to have retention problems, problems finding skilled people to fill technical jobs, etc.
They're their own worst enemy.
You ever ready the John Q. Public blog?
He does a great job of highlighting the circular firing squad that is todays USAF.
-
You ever ready the John Q. Public blog?
He does a great job of highlighting the circular firing squad that is todays USAF.
I do...he does a great job.
-
Would you kindly provide some support about either of those situations. for those claims, because I don't recall ever hearing either of those policy changes.
I will say this however: If the USA had volunteer military recruiting difficulties during the first years following 9/11/2001 we have a more serious problem, than most will care to ponder.
During WWII ten percent of the 160 million population served in uniform. People volunteered, and people were drafted.
Sorry, @truth_seeker...I didn't see your post until now.
Here's support for the felony waivers:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/21/military.waivers/ (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/21/military.waivers/)
The Army and Marine Corps are allowing convicted felons to serve in increasing numbers, newly released Department of Defense statistics show.
Recruits were allowed to enlist after having been convicted of crimes including assault, burglary, drug possession and making terrorist threats.
[...]
The Army defended its use of waivers as a response to a changing American society, arguing that only three in 10 Americans of military age "meet all our stringent medical, moral, aptitude or administrative requirements."
[...]
And for the huge bounties:
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2009/01/16/obama-to-confront-limits-of-americas-overstretched-military (https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2009/01/16/obama-to-confront-limits-of-americas-overstretched-military)
Recruiting, too, has been a considerable challenge for the all-volunteer military engaged in two tough wars. When the Army fell short of its recruiting goals in 2005, it raised the maximum recruiting age to 42 years old, and added sign-up bonuses as high as $40,000. It also began enlisting more recruits with general equivalency degrees rather than high school diplomas. Just over 70 percent of new recruits had high school diplomas in 2007, for example, a 25-year low. Moral waivers for new recruits with criminal histories are also on the rise, nearly doubling from 860 waivers for marines and soldiers convicted of felonies in 2007, up by 400 from 2006. The Pentagon argues that these are modest figures relative to the size of the force, and that 97 percent of Marine Corps recruits in 2008 had high school diplomas.
Yes, I know, I know there was crowing on TOS that they met recruitment goals...but only by paying out bonuses and weakening requirements.
As for Obama reversing these moral waivers, I don't see it anywhere in that timeframe on a Google search. I apologize, as I was absolutely sure of it -- it had seemed so bizarre that it happened as one of his first things, it stuck with me! But now, perhaps it was a from a dream (or, since it's Obama, that would have been a nightmare!). I apologize for making what seems to be a false claim. It was wholly unintentional. Thank you for asking for support!
-
Thanks for the follow up.
-
I do...he does a great job.
If I've read his subtle hints correctly he was a C-17 driver out of Charleston before he retired and started blogging.
-
Just do what George W. Bush did to keep recruitment numbers up during Iraq/Afghanistan: allow violent felons and hand out bundles of cash!
I still find it odd that re-instituting the violent-felon restrictions was one of the very first things Obama did upon coming into office.
BULLSHIT! "Violent felons" were never part of the equation.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2007/11/i_want_you_badly.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2007/11/i_want_you_badly.html)
-
Sorry, @truth_seeker...I didn't see your post until now.
Here's support for the felony waivers:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/21/military.waivers/ (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/21/military.waivers/)
And for the huge bounties:
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2009/01/16/obama-to-confront-limits-of-americas-overstretched-military (https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2009/01/16/obama-to-confront-limits-of-americas-overstretched-military)
Yes, I know, I know there was crowing on TOS that they met recruitment goals...but only by paying out bonuses and weakening requirements.
As for Obama reversing these moral waivers, I don't see it anywhere in that timeframe on a Google search. I apologize, as I was absolutely sure of it -- it had seemed so bizarre that it happened as one of his first things, it stuck with me! But now, perhaps it was a from a dream (or, since it's Obama, that would have been a nightmare!). I apologize for making what seems to be a false claim. It was wholly unintentional. Thank you for asking for support!
"Convicted felons" are worlds apart from "violent felons". Misrepresenting as usual, no surprise there. Your "tune" changes as you see fit.
-
I heard an appropriate term for much of the trouble we are seeing, with younger people.
"Infantization." Remaining young, too long. Never growing up. Adults with childlike minds.
BTW one observer said this mass murderer Cruz, had the mind of a 13-14 year old.
-
"Convicted felons" are worlds apart from "violent felons". Misrepresenting as usual, no surprise there. Your "tune" changes as you see fit.
Read the stories. They are violent felonies. For example, in 2007, they included manslaughter; sexual crimes, including rape, incest or sexual assault; negligent or vehicular homicide; and terroristic threats. (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html))
-
Read the stories. They are violent felonies. For example, in 2007, they included manslaughter; sexual crimes, including rape, incest or sexual assault; negligent or vehicular homicide; and terroristic threats. (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html))
This source was NOT included in your original assertion...15 "violent" out of how many total? Get to work spin meister...sheesh, I hear the NY Times is hiring.
-
Read the stories. They are violent felonies. For example, in 2007, they included manslaughter; sexual crimes, including rape, incest or sexual assault; negligent or vehicular homicide; and terroristic threats. (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html (https://www.deseretnews.com/article/695272486/More-convicted-felons-allowed-to-enlist-in-Army-Marines.html))
Well, we used to recruit violent felons...
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/SOoAAOSwMmBVrxHj/s-l300.jpg)