Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-17-2023, 05:14 PM
 
20,757 posts, read 8,573,399 times
Reputation: 14393

Advertisements

People don't want to be guinea pigs for Big Pharma.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2023, 12:03 AM
 
10 posts, read 3,110 times
Reputation: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
The military knows that. We knew that back in the late 70s when BMI first came into use in the military. They do fatness measurements when a troop goes "overweight" according to BMI, and if he's not truly over-fat he gets a waiver. To be frank, though, the percentage of overweight by BMI who aren't actually fat is probably small in the military overall. Most people in uniform are not rucking.

However, in terms of hot-button rhetoric, I don't know if reports of soldiers being overweight are taking from the gross BMI statistics or the net numbers after the fatness measurements have been taken and waivers issued.
They're taken from gross BMI statistics. There's a different formula - waist by height - which cuts the obesity rates by more than half when applied.

...I'm guessing the VAST majority of people "in the military" who are "overweight" are not fat. When I said that cutoff is misleadingly low, it really is. If shown a picture of someone at a 25 BMI, the average person would think they looked lean. You can be a marginal distance from skinny and have a 25 BMI if you have just enough muscle and/or fat mass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2023, 06:00 AM
 
Location: Central Massachusetts
6,594 posts, read 7,087,216 times
Reputation: 9332
Quote:
Originally Posted by hubli View Post
They're taken from gross BMI statistics. There's a different formula - waist by height - which cuts the obesity rates by more than half when applied.

...I'm guessing the VAST majority of people "in the military" who are "overweight" are not fat. When I said that cutoff is misleadingly low, it really is. If shown a picture of someone at a 25 BMI, the average person would think they looked lean. You can be a marginal distance from skinny and have a 25 BMI if you have just enough muscle and/or fat mass.
Funny thing is, when push comes to shove, the fat guys in your unit deploy along with the studs. Fail a PT test but your unit is deploying? No problem, off you go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2023, 07:52 AM
 
2,672 posts, read 2,233,988 times
Reputation: 5019
Quote:
Originally Posted by WK91 View Post
Something has fractured within American society, and I’m not sure you can actually point to one event and definitively say that was what did it.......
....
What did it: a fanatical faction highly motivated to take advantage of the freedoms of the West in order to destroy those freedoms. And the rest of us - we were too confident or too drunk or too busy to care. And those who were worried didn't know what to do or did the wrong things. In the 1970s, NOBODY would have believed what we're seeing today. But by 1990, they were starting to think they could vote their way out of it. And now, in 2023, we can't stop it because we've bought into the lie that "Freedom means Anything Goes" and if we stand up to the destroyers, then we're hypocrites.

The fracturing of the West, and America, began over 100 years ago, but in America it was "deep in the ground" at first, festering below the radar in academia, the arts and media, and in various populist movements: labor, civil rights, etc. Sometimes finding expression in fellow travelers (Alger Hiss, John Dewey, Woodrow Wilson) attaining positions of power through luck or the voters or whatever......

Much the same occurred in Europe and Asia from the late 19th century. But the fracturing there focused toward anti-clerical, anti-class, anti-monarchist expressions. American radicals focused toward anti-bourgeois, anti-materialism or anti-establishment, anti-traditional, anti-war, etc. The same sort of fracturing.... but with a different flavor. Gradually they shifted from Bolshevism to more Fabian tendencies. Because America was different than Eurasia. It demanded a different sort of revolution.

The overt anti-capitalism messaging gradually followed behind the identity politics/cultural liberation tsunami of the 1920s-1970s, becoming much more open and declarative as "socialist" in the 90s.

The Left has been very shrewd and patient, overall. Occasionally over-reaching in times of turmoil. Such as during Vietnam.... but as William Ayers said, they learned to take off the radical hippie costumes and dress like capitalists and fight from the inside. Largely through academia and through media. Winning hearts and minds. As Lenin said, sometimes we have to become capitalists to defeat capitalists.

After WW2, as counterculture began to surface in the West, particularly in America. It blossomed, but subtly and in ways not seen as something signaling something more important. The Western youth movement was a large part of fracturing open the first division in American society: The generation gap. In just 10 years, we went from Frank Sinatra to "Kill your parents". Energized by music and culture. By the 70s, the counterculture was in full force. Western youth now diverged from previous generations in profound ways...

And they were much more open to new ideas incubated in the campuses and classrooms of the West. And in turn, they bolstered the new establishment in key institutions. Each graduating class contributed a few more activists to repeat the cycle in ever-increasing virility.

We're seeing it reach critical mass. And soon, the past will be completely in the past. And all that will be left are those who see things a different way. Looking through a lens that is not what we appreciated at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2023, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Northern Virginia
6,793 posts, read 4,236,377 times
Reputation: 18571
20% is a pretty significant percentage given that it's kind of a moot point. In an actual major war eligible people would be 'voluntold' to join the military.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2023, 03:52 PM
 
28,666 posts, read 18,779,066 times
Reputation: 30944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veritas Vincit View Post
20% is a pretty significant percentage given that it's kind of a moot point. In an actual major war eligible people would be 'voluntold' to join the military.
It takes a specific kind of war to make a general draft worthwhile: A war that is at once low-tech, bloody, and extended. It takes a cannon-fodder war, such as Vietnam was.

The US spent 10 years in Vietnam with 55,000 dead, which required a draft. But the US spent 20 years in Afghanistan with 5,000 dead...and no draft needed.

The US is not going to fight another Vietnam-style cannon fodder war again that requires a general draft. Future wars will either be high-tech and extremely intense, but of duration too short to make a draft useful (it would take a year to put the first draftee into the field), or it will be a high-tech, low intensity war in which a general draft is not necessary.

What might happen, though, are small technical specialty drafts, such as the "doctor draft" that happened periodically during the Vietnam and Korean wars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2023, 12:18 AM
 
14,400 posts, read 14,298,103 times
Reputation: 45727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
It takes a specific kind of war to make a general draft worthwhile: A war that is at once low-tech, bloody, and extended. It takes a cannon-fodder war, such as Vietnam was.

The US spent 10 years in Vietnam with 55,000 dead, which required a draft. But the US spent 20 years in Afghanistan with 5,000 dead...and no draft needed.

The US is not going to fight another Vietnam-style cannon fodder war again that requires a general draft. Future wars will either be high-tech and extremely intense, but of duration too short to make a draft useful (it would take a year to put the first draftee into the field), or it will be a high-tech, low intensity war in which a general draft is not necessary.

What might happen, though, are small technical specialty drafts, such as the "doctor draft" that happened periodically during the Vietnam and Korean wars.

I doubt the military itself would support a draft again. There were simply too many problems. You had large numbers of soldiers going AWOL or deserting. There was a sizeable anti-Vietnam war movement among soldiers. In the future, soldiers will be even more highly trained than they are now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2023, 11:00 AM
 
2,672 posts, read 2,233,988 times
Reputation: 5019
QUOTE=Ralph_Kirk;66089894]It takes a specific kind of war to make a general draft worthwhile: A war that is at once low-tech, bloody, and extended. It takes a cannon-fodder war, such as Vietnam was.

The US spent 10 years in Vietnam with 55,000 dead, which required a draft. But the US spent 20 years in Afghanistan with 5,000 dead...and no draft needed.

The US is not going to fight another Vietnam-style cannon fodder war again that requires a general draft. Future wars will either be high-tech and extremely intense, but of duration too short to make a draft useful (it would take a year to put the first draftee into the field), or it will be a high-tech, low intensity war in which a general draft is not necessary.

What might happen, though, are small technical specialty drafts, such as the "doctor draft" that happened periodically during the Vietnam and Korean wars.[/quote]



Vietnam was a 25 year effort that began with Truman - even if we didn't call it that for the first decades that it was a covert half-baked attempt by Truman/Eisenhower/Kennedy to stick a finger in the levee to stem the flood of dominos. The rest of SEATO left us holding the bag. But at least we showed up. Hope NATO doesn't wind up the same way ultimately.

Vietnam didn't require a draft. Necessitywas manufactured due to poor planning and general administration-level incompetence through the 50s. We chose to fight the war the way the British chose to fight us in the American Revolution, or the North started out fighting the Confederates. With similar results. Like the French at Dien Ben Phu, yuck yuck. But even Truman said "we can't win it". Defeatism from the outset by the civilian leadership was definitely an ominous signal, despite the lip service to dominos and democracy.

We fought Vietnam as a defensive war which, had we done it this way against the Axis in WW2, we would have lost miserably. Instead of taking it to the NV in Hanoi with all the power and technology at our disposal, we chose to try to duke it out in the jungles, squads and platoons defending the South against guerilla fighters with fanatical dedication who recognized no rules, while we did our best to alienate our own allies. We were scared of the Chinese jumping in supposedly. We required no commitment from the remainder of the SEATO pact to HONOR THEIR COMMITMENT. The French just abandoned us to the fight and withdrew. And then we did NOTHING to keep up constant pressure on Uncle Ho to give up. We just acted in spurts of commitment followed by stalemate.

End result: We had all but run the NVA out of the entire county when we gave up (sound familiar) on the "unwinnable war", pulled out willy nilly and then did our best to clean up the chaos piece meal and weasel out of the promises we made to the SV government that we would continue to supply them arms and money to fight alone. That was a disgraceful Congressional failure swept under the rug. We listen to the armchair quarterbacks itemized our "failures" in Vietnam but notice how they overlook the really awful things we did.

Like how we've already gotten past the chaos of the Afghan withdrawal; civilians falling off the C-17. And the people we left behind to the Taliban whims.

The USA has really developed a penchant for quitting and running away since the baby boomer years. It's sad. And it's also seldom mentioned by all the neocons and globalists wanting to warmonger every few years. And what's all the waffling gotten us? Our enemies STILL call us aggressors and imperialists bent on taking over the planet. Even as we run away and pay them off.

Last edited by Led Zeppelin; 11-19-2023 at 11:41 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2023, 12:21 PM
 
28,666 posts, read 18,779,066 times
Reputation: 30944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zeppelin View Post

Vietnam didn't require a draft. Necessity was manufactured due to poor planning and general administration-level incompetence through the 50s.
Regardless of how the "necessity was manufactured," the fact is that Vietnam was a cannon fodder war that required a draft to continue at its pace, after Johnson enlarged American participation, for as long as ten years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2023, 06:25 PM
 
501 posts, read 1,064,455 times
Reputation: 670
A draft of any sort would destroy this country quicker than anything China or Russia could cook up. Antifa mobbed, looted, and destroyed entire downtowns for days on end and it was largely coordinated by poor youths via Twitter and other social media. So, what damage do you think a far, far larger group of well-educated youths with disposable income could do? They could and would bring the nation to its knees. If youths don't wanna fight, they AREN'T going to fight. Period. Unless, it's cause worth fighting for. That's the clincher. Plus, it would introduce a new dynamic that no one cared about in the past: it's sexist. Only men are required to die for their country, not women. It would never, ever fly today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:55 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top