Thirteen years ago, while serving as a Marine Corps recruiter in Washington State, I learned a startling secret about the future of our national defense: the younger generations are completely unqualified for military service. Almost three-quarters of America’s youth were too dumb, too sickly, too overweight, too drugged out, or too criminal corrupt to serve in the military (the other twenty-five percent were just too apathetic).
Unfortunately, not much has changed:
In a study being released Thursday in Washington, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and a group of retired military officers led by former Army Gen. Wesley Clark will sound the alarm bells and call young Americans’ relative lack of overall fitness for military duty a national security threat. The group, Mission: Readiness, will release a report that draws on Pentagon data showing that 75 percent of the nation’s 17- to 24-year-olds are ineligible for service for a variety of reasons.
Put another way, only 4.7 million of the 31.2 million 17- to 24-year-olds in a 2007 survey are eligible to enlist, according to a periodic survey commissioned by the Pentagon. This group includes those who have scored in the top four categories on the Armed Forces Qualification Test, or AQFT; eligible college graduates; and qualified college students.
According to the Pentagon, the ineligible population breaks down this way:
•Medical/physical problems, 35 percent.
•Illegal drug use, 18 percent.
•Mental Category V (the lowest 10 percent of the population), 9 percent.
•Too many dependents under age 18, 6 percent.
•Criminal record, 5 percent.
Amazingly enough, the military is still able to meet—and exceed—recruiting goals. If current trends continue, though, we’ll have a critical shortage of military personnel within another decade.
November 5th, 2009 | 9:24 am
I found this an interesting note, except for one line item
“•Mental Category V (the lowest 10 percent of the population), 9 percent.”
If only 9% of the 17-to-24 year olds are in the bottom 10%, doesn’t that mean they are smarter, on average, than the population at large?
November 5th, 2009 | 10:33 am
Eagle Scout, 15-20 mile a week runner, MIT-educated, rejected because I couldn’t complete training w/o taking 2 puffs of albuterol before a long run.
I don’t know whether that qualifies me as too sickly or too drugged, but it sure was dumb.
November 5th, 2009 | 10:45 am
If only 9% of the 17-to-24 year olds are in the bottom 10%, doesn’t that mean they are smarter, on average, than the population at large?
That’s actually a bit of a misnomer. The test used to determine that status measures “trainability” not necessarily IQ. But it also undercounts the problem because Cat. V is “markedly below average.” Cat. IV is “below average” which is an even larger pool of kids than Cat. V. The military only accepts 4% of this category for its total recruitment.
In my three years on recruiting I never put in anyone that was Cat IV (someone who scored a 31 or lower out of a possible 99 on the ASVAB test). I could have easily made my quota from this category, since we had a constant stream of kids come into my office who were eager but not very bright.
November 5th, 2009 | 10:55 am
Did we really need a post from Joe Carter the day after the Phillies lost the Series? Hey Joe Carter. When you played for Toronto, you ruined my childhood.
So where does this leave us? It means we will have to go outside the US for our troops like Rome bringing in the barbarians. It means we’ll have to cut a deal-you want to move to America, then join the troops.
Or maybe we can just stop launching wars overseas and defending countries like Japan and Germany.
Or maybe we need to go to College Dem and Young Republican events and force young people who support Obama’s wars and W’s wars to actually fight those wars.
Or maybe we force everyone who has subscriptions to the New Republic and the Weekly Standard to be enlisted.
We can even have a unit for Catholics who think the Holy Father and John Paul the Great were wrong on the Iraq war. Captain Novak and Lt. Weigel can lead the Neuhuas Battalion!
Or maybe we keep recruiting little girls to fight our wars-Jessica Lynch, we hardly knew ye.
November 5th, 2009 | 11:23 am
>>you want to move to America, then join the troops.>>
Already legal. 3 years active duty and you’re qualified to be a citizen. (I think it’s 3 years)
Or we could have mandatory military service. Except that the military absolutely doesn’t want conscripts. The civilian population is too recalcitrant to waste training time on.
November 5th, 2009 | 11:27 am
>>I don’t know whether that qualifies me as too sickly or too drugged, but it sure was dumb.>>
Sure. Suppose you get assigned to Iraq or Afghanistan – who’s going to make sure you have your Albuterol? What happens if you’re in combat and lose your inhaler?
If they had separate categories for those who fight and those who support, it would be one thing, but what’s the point of having a troop who is incapable of sustaining combat if you need troops to fight?
November 5th, 2009 | 12:01 pm
Joe, doesn’t “eager but not very bright” define the Marine Corps?
Oh, yeah…and brave. Brave, eager but not very bright.
Q: How many Marines does it take to plant a flag on a hill nobody will want two weeks from now?
A: How many ya got?
Your Army buddy,
Bill
November 5th, 2009 | 12:11 pm
I suppose the big question is how this has changed over time, that is, how much of an actual trend it is (rather than, say, just being random variation). It’s inevitably going to be the case that some of the population will have medical and physical problems, be drug users, have lots of young dependents, fall into Category V, and have a criminal record. So the really important question is how much of the ineligibility is really avoidable.
November 5th, 2009 | 1:07 pm
And, of course, the rest of the young people are just too damned smart to let themselves get shot at.
November 5th, 2009 | 1:24 pm
Meanwhile, China and Iran have huge surplusses of healthy young men with nothing to do. I’ll bet they’re licking their chops over this one, waiting for the odds to be just right…
November 5th, 2009 | 2:40 pm
After the Nam war and the end of the draft, the worry was the demographic crash post baby boomer peak. Instead we got the all-volunteer military and, over a quarter century, the best military in the world. How we use them is another story. IOW, I’m not too worried…yet.
November 5th, 2009 | 6:19 pm
My son, before heading out to USMC boot camp was warned by an active duty Marine to “Watch out for female Marines”. The following summer, while training at 29 Palms, he started to develop his own opinion.
For the most part it seems that if you are stationed at 29 Palms, cinch up your running shoes tight, as even by USMC standards, they like to run out there. A typical morning’s PT would include at least a 6 mile run through the sand. Men who dropped out, as you might imagine, where given a serious “Come to Jesus” by highly motivated instructors.
Female Marines who felt like dropping out,……….. just casually dropped out, and were ignored.
You draw your own inference. My point is, we should thank God that there are still fit, and able young men willing to serve their country.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact