Can someone please explain the rationale behind this ?

I expect he can handle the job of a Human Resources Officer in the Navy. It might very well be a job they have trouble filling.
 
Why wouldn't he be qualified for this job? He's an attorney, with a degree and everything. Our Lord and Savior James N. Mattis recommended him. That's good enough for me.
 
All kinds of people get commissioned later in life. The needs of the Service drive all. Upper age limits and waivers can easily be changed.

We can either believe he has a true desire to serve, or tinge our view with a bit of cynicism, and figure he’s checking a block to show he’s served and will one day be a veteran. As long as he performs his duties in an acceptable manner, lives up to the standards expected of an officer, I am fine, though a bit bemused, by it. I always wonder what his new CO will think in these cases...
 
The checking off the box thing hadn't even occurred to me. I thought I was jaded ! ;)
 
It could be a sliding scale - 99% pure desire to serve and 1% “this will round out my political résumé nicely.” Or not. We can generously add in a Renaissance Man element, someone interested in all paths of life.

If he takes his oath and serves honorably, I’m good.
 
There is goodness for the service in these roles as it exposes key influencers/decision makers to realities of DOD life. Plus, these individuals are uniquely qualified to fill roles. I remember a decade again being in a city council meeting in Baghdad and two of the civil affairs advisers are state legislators who can help the Iraqis understand what it means to govern and be receptive to voters in a democracy. It was pretty cool too see.
 
@sheriff3, why the heck not? If he’s willing and qualified and an appropriate role exists for him, then more power to him. I myself wish I’d had the opportunity to serve as an older — ahem, more experienced and enlightened — person in the military.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top