NationStates Jolt Archive

Military Shuns Many of Recruiting Age
Email this Story

Mar 12, 5:08 PM (ET)

By PAULINE JELINEK


WASHINGTON (AP) - Uncle Sam wants YOU, that famous Army recruiting poster says. But does he really? Not if you're a Ritalin-taking, overweight, Generation Y couch potato - or some combination of the above.

As for that fashionable "body art" that the military still calls a tattoo, having one is grounds for rejection, too.

With U.S. casualties rising in wars overseas and more opportunities in the civilian work force from an improved U.S. economy, many young people are shunning a career in the armed forces. But recruiting is still a two-way street - and the military, too, doesn't want most people in this prime recruiting age group of 17 to 24.

Of some 32 million Americans now in this group, the Army deems the vast majority too obese, too uneducated, too flawed in some way, according to its estimates for the current budget year.

"As you look at overall population and you start factoring out people, many are not eligible in the first place to apply," said Doug Smith, spokesman for the Army Recruiting Command.

Some experts are skeptical.

Previous Defense Department studies have found that 75 percent of young people are ineligible for military service, noted Charles Moskos of Northwestern University. While the professor emeritus who specializes in military sociology says it is "a baloney number," he acknowledges he has no figures to counter it.

"Recruiters are looking for reasons other than themselves," said David R. Segal, director of the Center for Research on Military Organization at the University of Maryland. "So they blame the pool."

The military's figures are estimates, based partly on census numbers. They are part of an elaborate analysis the military does as it struggles each year to compete with colleges and companies for the nation's best and brightest, plan for future needs and maintain diversity.

The Census Bureau estimates that the overall pool of people who would be in the military's prime target age has shrunk as American society ages. There were 1 million fewer 18- to 24-year olds in 2004 than in 2000, the agency says.

The pool shrinks to 13.6 million when only high school graduates and those who score in the upper half on a military service aptitude test are considered. The 30 percent who are high school dropouts are not the top choice of today's professional, all-volunteer and increasingly high-tech military force.

Other factors include:

_the rising rate of obesity; some 30 percent of U.S. adults are now considered obese.

_a decline in physical fitness; one-third of teenagers are now believed to be incapable of passing a treadmill test.

_a near-epidemic rise in the use of Ritalin and other stimulants to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Potential recruits are ineligible for military service if they have taken such a drug in the previous year.

Doctors prescribe these drugs to about 2 million children and 1 million adults a month, according to a federal survey. Many more are believed to be using such stimulants recreationally and to stay awake longer to boost academic and physical performance.

Other potential recruits are rejected because they have criminal histories and too many dependents. Subtract 4.4 million from the pool for these people and for the overweight.

Others can be rejected for medical problems, from blindness to asthma. The Army estimate has subtracted 2.6 million for this group.

That leaves 4.3 million fully qualified potential recruits and an estimated 2.3 million more who might qualify if given waivers on some of their problems.

The bottom line: a total 6.6 million potential recruits from all men and women in the 32 million-person age group.

In the budget year that ended last September, 15 percent of recruits required a waiver in order to be accepted for active duty services - or about 11,000 people of some 73,000 recruited.

Most waivers were for medical problems. Some were for misdemeanors such as public drunkenness, resisting arrest or misdemeanor assault - prompting criticism that the Army is lowering its standards.

This year the Army is trying to recruit 80,000 people; all the services are recruiting about 180,000.

And about the tattoos: They are not supposed to be on your neck, refer to gang membership, be offensive, or in any way conflict with military standards on integrity, respect and team work. The military is increasingly giving waivers for some types of tattoos, officials said.

So much for the draft so many were screaming that was coming. Just lift the waver on tatoos and introduce potential recruits to weight watchers. (Oh, wait, and we might want to lift the congressionally imposed "peace dividend" cap.)

I hope that proves true for me.

So much for the draft so many were screaming that was coming. Just lift the waver on tatoos and introduce potential recruits to weight watchers. (Oh, wait, and we might want to lift the congressionally imposed "peace dividend" cap.)Dang it. I'm not obese enough, drugged enough, or other to avoid the draft. I do have a nice letter from the German military telling me I'm totally incapable of military service should Uncle Sam try to draft me though.

So much for the draft so many were screaming that was coming. Just lift the waver on tatoos and introduce potential recruits to weight watchers. (Oh, wait, and we might want to lift the congressionally imposed "peace dividend" cap.)

The only contention w the article is on tatoos.

You've always been able to have tatoos. You just couldn't have them on the head, face, hands, or neck. The "waiver" is little more than a signed boilerplate form. I got one when I first went in for being underweight . They've also just changed policy that tatoos are allowed on the neck and hands as long as they aren't "extreme, sexist, racist, or offensive" but still no face or head.

Just another ereason to get a tatto...

I hope that proves true for me.

You're not an American. Stop trying to provoke another anti-European rant.

Dang it. I'm not obese enough, drugged enough, or other to avoid the draft. I do have a nice letter from the German military telling me I'm totally incapable of military service should Uncle Sam try to draft me though.
They never even bothered drafting me!!!:mad: Ich fühl mich vergessen!!!:(

The only contention w the article is on tatoos.

You've always been able to have tatoos. You just couldn't have them on the head, face, hands, or neck. The "waiver" is little more than a signed boilerplate form. I got one when I first went in for being underweight . They've also just changed policy that tatoos are allowed on the neck and hands as long as they aren't "extreme, sexist, racist, or offensive" but still no face or head.

Whats the actual argument militarily against tattoo's exactly? Does it stop camouflage being used or something like that?

They never even bothered drafting me!!!:mad: Ich fühl mich vergessen!!!:(They'll probably come get you later in life then :D

Dang it. I'm not obese enough, drugged enough, or other to avoid the draft. I do have a nice letter from the German military telling me I'm totally incapable of military service should Uncle Sam try to draft me though.

Too bad theres no draft in effect at all. These are people who want in.

Dang it. I'm not obese enough, drugged enough, or other to avoid the draft. I do have a nice letter from the German military telling me I'm totally incapable of military service should Uncle Sam try to draft me though.

Just get a tattoo, then. I'll design you one :D

You're not an American. Stop trying to provoke another anti-European rant.

I haven't even said anything :upyours:

They'll probably come get you later in life then :D
Puh!!! If they do I'll just tell them to fuck off. You didn't call me in when I was 18. Now I don't want to anymore.

Whats the actual argument militarily against tattoo's exactly? Does it stop camouflage being used or something like that?
Tattoos do not meet military standards for appearance and uniformity. They distract from the appearance of the soldier.

Too bad theres no draft in effect at all. These are people who want in.Never really had much for the draft anyway...

So much for the draft so many were screaming that was coming. Just lift the waver on tatoos and introduce potential recruits to weight watchers. (Oh, wait, and we might want to lift the congressionally imposed "peace dividend" cap.)

You know what I find scary about this? I grew up in a small town in Germany with a large military base. To this day, I keep telling myself not to take the people I met there as representative of the USA in any way, as they were incredibly rude, had little to no self-restraint, were uneducated to the point that would give me a headache, and generally behaved in a way that became proverbial (my mom used to scold my brothers for disbehaving "Fuehr dich net auf wie a Ami - Don't behave like an American")

Now, if theses people actually are a selected elite..... :eek:





I mean.... :eek:

Whats the actual argument militarily against tattoo's exactly? Does it stop camouflage being used or something like that?
The smell of the ink and the bright colors can give away your position in the jungle.*nodds*

Tattoos do not meet military standards for appearance and uniformity. They distract from the appearance of the soldier.
Wouldn't that be an advantage? They could be used to distract the enemy:
"Hey, Charlie! Take a look at my tattoo!"
"Oh, you American imperialist pig have very cool Harley Davidson ink, let me take a closer look..."
BANG!

Tattoos do not meet military standards for appearance and uniformity. They distract from the appearance of the soldier.

I've already done my military service, bt if I were young, and there was a draft started, I'd have 'Fuck a Duck" tattooed on my chest along with a graphical representation of the phrase. :D

Just get a tattoo, then. I'll design you one :DWe'll see. The US has no draft at the moment, though they still have selective service around.

Wouldn't that be an advantage? They could be used to distract the enemy:
"Hey, Charlie! Take a look at my tattoo!"
"Oh, you American imperialist pig have very cool Harley Davidson ink, let me take a closer look..."
BANG!Wrong enemy you're thinking about.
It would distract the enemies that dress up as officers of your own military and inspect the troops to see if they meet dress requirements :D

I've already done my military service, bt if I were young, and there was a draft started, I'd have 'Fuck a Duck" tattooed on my chest along with a graphical representation of the phrase. :D

They'ld still take you. You'ld have to get it on your neck or forehead. :)

is it sad that I worry that my children won't be able to volunteer to serve if they wanted to?

my husband tried to sign up and he was turned down, he was really upset, he really wanted to be a Marine. My children will never be able to be in the armed forces even if the wanted to, that's so sad for me.

I however still have the army recruiter that calls me about once a month, I keep telling him that I am too selfish to leave my family and to bother someone else, but still he calls (probably will until I turn 25 next year, he has been calling since I was 17 and got a perfect score on my asvab, it wasn't even a hard test :confused: )

Tattoos do not meet military standards for appearance and uniformity. They distract from the appearance of the soldier.

How exactly? Say I have a tattoo on my shoulder of a rose. The only time it would be seen would be in showers or when changing, and it would hardly be a distraction. I can understand tattoo's on the face or other exposed piece of skin, but otherwise it seems rather odd...

is it sad that I worry that my children won't be able to volunteer to serve if they wanted to?

Why? Are they fat? Drugged up? Tatood?

How exactly? Say I have a tattoo on my shoulder of a rose. The only time it would be seen would be in showers or when changing, and it would hardly be a distraction. I can understand tattoo's on the face or other exposed piece of skin, but otherwise it seems rather odd...

You can have one on your shoulder. Previously, it was ones that were visible while wearing a uniform (head, face,neck, hands). Like I said earlier, they've just changed it so you can have non-offensive ones on your neck or hands now.

Why? Are they fat? Drugged up? Tatood?
health issues that would be impossible to deal with in a combat situation.

You can have one on your shoulder. Previously, it was ones that were visible while wearing a uniform (head, face,neck, hands). Like I said earlier, they've just changed it so you can have non-offensive ones on your neck or hands now.

Ohhhh. My apologies.

They'ld still take you. You'ld have to get it on your neck or forehead. :)

Hmm... I'f I'm going to have a visible tattoo, it'd have to be pretty good. Like
'PizzaPussySanta'. Because everyone likes one of those things. :D

borrowed from a Dave Atell joke

I find the military complaining that they don't have enough "qualified" recruits to be an excuse. Any minor(and even many major) factors that would preclude someone from service get waived. If you score well on your ASVAB they'll take you even if you're a felon, they'll even offer to expunge your record so you can get a "fresh start." If the military wants you and you apply, they'll take you and figure out what paperwork needs to be filed later.

The big problem the military is having with recruitment is that they ask for too much, especially in the highly trained specialties. I know from personal experiance that there can be very generous offers(high five digit signing bonuses, automatic officer commissions, etc) if you have specific skills they need for a hard to find position, but the time requirements are a huge barrier. When I was being recruited I was told that they would expect at least a decade of service if I wasn't injured, and that nearly all of it would be overseas. As the military moves increasingly towards highly-specialized and highly trained forces, they are going to run into the problem that quite a few otherwise good recruits are simply unwilling to enter into a job that will last 8-16 years without a chance to leave.

So much for the draft so many were screaming that was coming. Just lift the waver on tatoos and introduce potential recruits to weight watchers. (Oh, wait, and we might want to lift the congressionally imposed "peace dividend" cap.)
You know as well as I do that if the draft were ever reinstated, a lot of those restrictions would disappear in a heartbeat. Those restrictions are there because the military wants the best people they can get, and I think that's a good idea.

But if we're in a situation where the draft becomes politically feasible again--and we'd have to be in a world of shit for that to happen--then lots of those people who are ineligible now would suddenly be able to tote a rifle.

Tattoos do not meet military standards for appearance and uniformity. They distract from the appearance of the soldier.

As I'm pretty sure you know what you're talking about, considering your credentials and all, I'm going to take your word for it that that is the reason ... but you must admit it's a stupid reason.

I mean ... who goes into battle naked anymore? :D

I mean ... who goes into battle naked anymore? :D

Lord knows, it's been a while. :)

Lord knows, it's been a while. :)

Considering LG's character, I bet it wasn't all that long ago. Why, I bet while he was on duty at one time, he dressed up as a mustard covered hotdog while performing some bizarre ritual dance around his command console and tap dancing the commands out with his toes. :p

Considering LG's character, I bet it wasn't all that long ago. Why, I bet while he was on duty at one time, he dressed up as a mustard covered hotdog while performing some bizarre ritual dance around his command console and tap dancing the commands out with his toes. :p

Good god, no! I took my duties very seriously! On the other hand, during my free time... :D

Bed wetting is cuase for rejection also.

Why just recruit the goods? Why not go for the bad ones and let them all get killed.

Why just recruit the goods? Why not go for the bad ones and let them all get killed.
Let's start with the politicians.

Bed wetting is cuase for rejection also.

Why just recruit the goods? Why not go for the bad ones and let them all get killed.

Why just recruit scum like robbers, rapists and paedophiles? Modern militaries aren't the same as they were in the 17th Century, taking anyone who could swing a sword or run well. To recruit scum like that would be a waste - cannon fodder isn't needed ,except for a possible invasion scenario when all hands would have to be drafted.

Although using them to clear possible minefields might be a possible use.

Damn, all those Vietnam draft dodgers never had to escape to Canada, they could have simply got a sexually explicit gang tattoo. I bet they must be kicking themselves now. :p

Good god, no! I took my duties very seriously! On the other hand, during my free time... :D

Did you have an altar to the great god Lord High Weinerstein by your command console and sacrifice a tiny little hotdog each day? :p

Or maybe it was the Bowling Bowl of Testicular Agony that you had there? :P

Considering LG's character, I bet it wasn't all that long ago. Why, I bet while he was on duty at one time, he dressed up as a mustard covered hotdog while performing some bizarre ritual dance around his command console and tap dancing the commands out with his toes. :pPshaw. I bet LG doesn't have the guts to do something like that :p

Pshaw. I bet LG doesn't have the guts to do something like that :p

If he will let a Martial Artist kick him in the jewels 4 time....he will do most anything.

If he will let a Martial Artist kick him in the jewels 4 time....he will do most anything.
I know. I purposefully used the sentence that gets him into trouble... Must I add sarcasm tags to everything?

I know. I purposefully used the sentence that gets him into trouble... Must I add sarcasm tags to everything?


No you dont have to with me. I know you were being sarcastic and my comment was just agreeing with you-not contradicting. Like 'yes i know-youre right, since he will let a man kick him in the balls 4 times, no way would he do <insert insane task here> hence I was being sarcastic too.

I like how you can be considered not eligible for a job that (well, let's face it, often) requires killing people if you have a sordid tatoo.

I like how you can be considered not eligible for a job that (well, let's face it, often) requires killing people if you have a sordid tatoo.You're required to partake in events where you're wearing your dress uniform probably more often than you are required to kill anyone, if ever.

How exactly? Say I have a tattoo on my shoulder of a rose. The only time it would be seen would be in showers or when changing, and it would hardly be a distraction. I can understand tattoo's on the face or other exposed piece of skin, but otherwise it seems rather odd...

They don't disallow tattoos other than those that are exposed when in uniform and even then there are exceptions. A large percentage of people in the military have tattoos. I have one and never had to sign any waiver. Tattoo rules, piercings and other adornments are ruled against when they are exposed because the military seeks to have a fairly uniform appearance of its soldiers. It does so for appearance to civilians and to make soldiers less identifiable to civilians (as to why that second part is important, ever heard of Viet Nam).

You know what I find scary about this? I grew up in a small town in Germany with a large military base. To this day, I keep telling myself not to take the people I met there as representative of the USA in any way, as they were incredibly rude, had little to no self-restraint, were uneducated to the point that would give me a headache, and generally behaved in a way that became proverbial (my mom used to scold my brothers for disbehaving "Fuehr dich net auf wie a Ami - Don't behave like an American")

Now, if theses people actually are a selected elite..... :eek:





I mean.... :eek:

Perhaps your mother and you should have realized that the the military is not the selected elite and that in some ways a military is a numbers game. They are, however, trained not to behave in such a manner. The group that generally spends a lot of time off-base, particularly that base, are generally the roudiest and rudest of the soldiers. It's like judging Americans by the ones you see on Jerry Springer.

Perhaps your mother and you should have realized that the the military is not the selected elite and that in some ways a military is a numbers game. They are, however, trained not to behave in such a manner. The group that generally spends a lot of time off-base, particularly that base, are generally the roudiest and rudest of the soldiers. It's like judging Americans by the ones you see on Jerry Springer.

That's excatly my point, thank you. For years, I've been telling myself that with every negative experience I made with them.

And now this article tells me that in fact, these people belong to 25 % that the US army deems eligible? Don't you think that's scary? I find it scary.

That's excatly my point, thank you. For years, I've been telling myself that with every negative experience I made with them.

And now this article tells me that in fact, these people belong to 25 % that the US army deems eligible? Don't you think that's scary? I find it scary.

It deems them eligible based on physical requirements and an ability to pass a fairly simple test that I and Smunkee both scored perfectly on (I know Smunkee is cool and all, but even I...). Military personnel, particularly in wartime, are more physically elite than anything else. And in some branches, the physical standards aren't even that high. It depends on how that branch is designed to use their people.