If you wish to have any credibility and to continue a dialogue (with me replying to your questions) then you will need to answer (with links or quotes) my questions concerning your statements:
I still fail to see what your point is. So now you say they don't lose that many good candidates?
Now? I included my first post from the first page of this thread to help you remember. What part of that post supports NOW?
I feel like you may have misinterpreted this post of mine. I apologize for not being more clear. I was not saying that you changed your opinion or anything like that. If the use of the word "now" was the issue than I apologize. I realize that you've had a consistent opinion throughout this entire discussion.
Just so that we are perfect clear: I didn't misinterpret your post. You either chose to twist my words or failed to clearly state the meaning of those words in order to ask a question about a point that I did not make.
---------------------------
2)You advocate that system because it would supposedly attract more well-qualified people.
Where did I say it would
attract "more well-qualified people"? Please quote the post so that I can see which one of my responses you are failing to comprehend or which one I wasn't clear.
2)You say that the AF puts itself at a disadvantage by not offering the same program as Army and Navy and that costs the AF quality candidates. Here is YOUR own post that says so:
You seem to have difficulty understanding the meaning of the word: "attract". I never said the AF had ANY trouble "attracting" qualified people, or that going with a Full Ride scholarship program (like the Army or Navy) would "attract" any more well-qualified people. The post you quote in support of your statement does not mention attracting candidates at all. It does mention that "I would prefer a scholarship system that gave EVERY candidate the same opportunity to
join the AF and go to a school that they could get accepted (as in the Navy & Army programs)...". I don't think I've ever said the AF has ANY trouble attracting candidates.
Would you care to point out which post I mentioned "attracting" more qualified candidates by changing the system, or are you willing to concede that you MEANT something different?
--------------------------------------
3) Despite featuring your favored policy, the Army DOES NOT have the abundance of well-qualified cadets that you say they'd have.
This will be my third request in this post for an actual quote (of mine) that supports your statement. I do not recall having said that because the Army uses a Full Ride scholarship program that they would therefor have an abundance of well-qualified candidates.
I'm still waiting for the quote that supports this statement
"..the Army DOES NOT have the abundance of well-qualified cadets that
you say they'd have."
--------------------------
As you requested, I quoted one of your posts that says you think the AF should use a scholarship program similar to the Army and Navy.
Once again a misquote. Where did I ask you to quote "one of your posts that says you think the AF should use a scholarship program similar to the Army and Navy"?
I asked you specifically to substantiate three statements that you made by providing quotes. As far as I can tell you were unable to do that for any of your statements.
It
seems to me that you are a very enthusiastic AFROTC student that feels the need to defend his choice of careers and has either glossed over reading my posts in his fervor to respond, or perhaps isn't choosing his words very carefully in his posts.
Instead of abusing the patience of anyone bored enough to still be reading this thread, why don't we just agree to disagree in THIS thread and agree that in the future you'll be more careful?
