Got a ?? about Military pictures

[GeorgieGirl]

The "NEWS" responce answered my question. It's miss leading at best. There are still certain MOS's (Military Occupational Specialties) that will not be effected by the draw down. i.e. EOD or Data/Communication guys. The military spends a ton of money training them. Mix that with the fact that they can translate their talents to the civilian work force and make some good money and the Marine Corps will give them a great incentive to stay in. The rest of us are under some severe scrutiny though.

The Marines are downsizing from approx 204K to a goal of 186K in total force. How do we do that? we enforce the standards harder and get rid of waivers for entry level contracts. Recruiters have ALWAYS had quotas and always will. The standards really didn't change at all. The level we enforce them has drastically changed. I would bet money if a person showed up to a recruiter today with a GED, they would get turned away. I recently watched a Gunnery Sergeant with 17 yrs and 10 months of active duty service get the boot. Why? Money. Money drives everything we do. If you want to know how the military is doing, watch the world value of the dollar. We are downsizing to save money, and that's the bottom line. Why spend the money to train a kid with a GED when we can train the guy that has a college degree? There's the "Standard". I hope that puts some light on it.

And to the OP, sorry to further jack your thread with info you didn't ask for. I'd love to see the photos you took.

This is going to turn politcal in a hurry I fear....Of course the war needed to be over...the money is needed and there is an election coming. Those are all the obvious things. I have no complaints with the bonus to stay on, I think like any other business that there should be incentives to stay on for a career and I do feel that the Armed Forces is big business and has been for the past 10 or so years.

To say to me, train the guy with the college education vs. the guy with the GED (guy being gender neutral) is like DUH, that's obvious, why wouldn't any business want the most studied and mature people they can find, but that's not really the stats, is it. To mix it up a bit for more fun and to share somehting very local...My girlfirends son is being pursued by recruiters as a junior in HS. He is of Korean descent, has perfect pitch, he plays the trombone, is a gifted student with genius IQ and they will roll the red carpet out just for him to play trombone in the Band. He can have his pick of colleges and scholarships. He's not homeless or shiftless or without friends or family. So yes, business should always go for the best the market will bear when filling a job. Perhaps right now those college grads who have no jobs and have not been able to finds jobs due to the economy and job market might be more apt to consider enlisting, so why not consider them before all others when you have the melting pot of so many higher educated individuals to choose from.

But that is now, not three years ago when the world economy high on life and the demographics and the standards were much different.

"My girlfirends son is being pursued by recruiters as a junior in HS. He is of Korean descent, has perfect pitch, he plays the trombone, is a gifted student with genius IQ and they will roll the red carpet out just for him to play trombone in the Band."

You just said the same thing I did. Now I go back to my original point, the NEWS. Be careful thinking the "War is over." LOL. A couple pictures of a wife hugging her Sailor that just got home on the news is misleading.

If I pull all of the major units out of Iraq and replace them with "Individual Augments" I can tell you we have no more "units" in Iraq. I still have a military force on deck over there don't I? If I tell the service men and women that are still over there "You are on a stability mission now." I can tell the American public that "Combat operations" have been terminated. It's that simple.

Sounds to me things are exactly the way they were 3 years ago.

Let me rephase what I meant by 'three years ago' Three years ago college students/grads had jobs, high paying powerful jobs. They didn't need the Armed Forces. The demographics of what the Armed Forces could get three years ago (and what they needed to relax to get bodies) and what they can get today are not the same.

As for the War, its over in my mind. There will always be manpower all over the world, just as there always has been, but the reasons are different. The mission is different. I think we are saying the same thing in that regard.

 

[EIngerson]

This is going to turn politcal in a hurry I fear....Of course the war needed to be over...the money is needed and there is an election coming. Those are all the obvious things. I have no complaints with the bonus to stay on, I think like any other business that there should be incentives to stay on for a career and I do feel that the Armed Forces is big business and has been for the past 10 or so years.

To say to me, train the guy with the college education vs. the guy with the GED (guy being gender neutral) is like DUH, that's obvious, why wouldn't any business want the most studied and mature people they can find, but that's not really the stats, is it. To mix it up a bit for more fun and to share somehting very local...My girlfirends son is being pursued by recruiters as a junior in HS. He is of Korean descent, has perfect pitch, he plays the trombone, is a gifted student with genius IQ and they will roll the red carpet out just for him to play trombone in the Band. He can have his pick of colleges and scholarships. He's not homeless or shiftless or without friends or family. So yes, business should always go for the best the market will bear when filling a job. Perhaps right now those college grads who have no jobs and have not been able to finds jobs due to the economy and job market might be more apt to consider enlisting, so why not consider them before all others when you have the melting pot of so many higher educated individuals to choose from.

But that is now, not three years ago when the world economy high on life and the demographics and the standards were much different.

"My girlfirends son is being pursued by recruiters as a junior in HS. He is of Korean descent, has perfect pitch, he plays the trombone, is a gifted student with genius IQ and they will roll the red carpet out just for him to play trombone in the Band."

You just said the same thing I did. Now I go back to my original point, the NEWS. Be careful thinking the "War is over." LOL. A couple pictures of a wife hugging her Sailor that just got home on the news is misleading.

If I pull all of the major units out of Iraq and replace them with "Individual Augments" I can tell you we have no more "units" in Iraq. I still have a military force on deck over there don't I? If I tell the service men and women that are still over there "You are on a stability mission now." I can tell the American public that "Combat operations" have been terminated. It's that simple.

Sounds to me things are exactly the way they were 3 years ago.

Let me rephase what I meant by 'three years ago' Three years ago college students/grads had jobs, high paying powerful jobs. They didn't need the Armed Forces. The demographics of what the Armed Forces could get three years ago (and what they needed to relax to get bodies) and what they can get today are not the same.

As for the War, its over in my mind. There will always be manpower all over the world, just as there always has been, but the reasons are different. The mission is different. I think we are saying the same thing in that regard.

We weren't, but it's a moot point. We could branch off in a thousand directions with this one. Happy New Year, I'll see you in 2012.