Report: US Military is too white and too male at the top

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think I'll go with the "This article is CRAP" opinion.

I agree totally with bullet. I am all for diversity. SO LONG AS THE STANDARDS AREN'T COMPROMISED!!!

However; here's the problem. Diversity, gays, islam, religion in general, etc... can NOT be discussed openly and objectively by most of the Washington insiders. And that includes many of the military's senior officials. They tend to politicize the topics/debates. Whatever is being said, will be said in such a way to benefit the individual saying it. The truth is: With the political correctness, affirmative action, and diversity that our country has pushed for about 3 decades now, it's almost impossible to maintain the level of diversity that they are seeking, while maintaining the standards that they want.

Every other college, university, large corporation, and other social entity is also seeking "Diversity". It improves their image and political/economic stature. Because of this, it becomes more difficult for the military to compete for the same high quality individuals. That's not to say that the diversity students that the academy do get are substandard. Just that the pool to work with is smaller than the majority, and smaller yet when competing with all the other institutions who want the same individuals.

Bottom line is: Diversity is good. it's good at all levels of the military. From an academy cadet to an enlisted airman, to a SNCO or Flag Officer. Unfortunately, there is no way the military will reach their exact diversity goals without lowering the standards in certain areas. Just not going to happen. The pool to work with gets smaller every day due to competition.

That's why the article is crap. What they SAY and what they DO are 2 totally different things.
 
Christcorp said:
I think I'll go with the "This article is CRAP" opinion.
Click to expand...

Glad you can make your contribution to the downhill slide. True colors shine through.
But, perhaps you can expound on just what this means.
Do you means that the report is not true? Just drivel that someone made up? Do you mean that it doesn't matter if the military stacked with blacks who are led by whites? Are you from Wyoming?





Disclaimer: See post #18.
 
scoutpilot said:
God, can we just fast forward through the inevitable indignation, rancor, vitriol, and subsequent references to the famous case of Rubber v. Glue and just lock this one already?

Allow me to predict the future:

Someone white and male will say the report is crap. Someone white and female will call him a misogynist doo-doo head. Someone else with a non-descript username will imply that others are racist. 14 pages of the same 3 arguments will ensue. Mods will warn everyone to play nice and be constructive. Two more people will take potshots. Thread will be locked.
Click to expand...

I like that you said "doo-doo head". Made me snicker.:thumb:
 
LineInTheSand said:
Glad you can make your contribution to the downhill slide. True colors shine through.
But, perhaps you can expound on just what this means.
Do you means that the report is not true? Just drivel that someone made up? Do you mean that it doesn't matter if the military stacked with blacks who are led by whites? Are you from Wyoming?





Disclaimer: See post #18.
Click to expand...

I'll do something I normally don't do. I'll be very brief.

I think the article is crap, because it's simple rhetoric. It's obvious that any proposed changes will be attempted with "Quality" as a secondary concern. That's why it's crap.
 
Thank you for sharing your opinions

On a very difficult topic, I have enjoyed reading 5 pages of pretty level-headed posts. I'm a frequent lurker, trying to wrap my mind around the process of helping my non-white daughter achieve her goal of becoming an officer in the military. She and I both expect great things from her, and understand that a career in the military will mean growing a thick skin, and never playing the race/gender card.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Glad you can make your contribution to the downhill slide. True colors shine through.
But, perhaps you can expound on just what this means.
Do you means that the report is not true? Just drivel that someone made up? Do you mean that it doesn't matter if the military stacked with blacks who are led by whites? Are you from Wyoming?





Disclaimer: See post #18.
Click to expand...

54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry, COL Shaw.

What mattered was the leadership, not skin colors.
 
Does it really matter what a person's race/gender/orientation/blahblah is in the military? Do I really care about what they look like? No, of course not. As many posters have said, it's about performance and aptitude.

Diversity is important because it allows us to view a topic from multiple perspectives. But isn't diversity more than just race/gender/orientation/blahblah? What about up bringing? Socio-economic status? Place of origin? I still don't know how we can have the military represent the race/gender/orientiation/blahblah of American when only something like 3% of the population is in the military.

As someone else pointed out, desire is just as important. Hell, three of my classmates were self-prep (meaning they paid to go to prep school), one already has a degree in architecture, one was a semester away from graduating, and three are prior enlisted.

Maybe it's just me, but when I think of diversity, I think of life experiences. Perhaps Congress is too white and too male? Maybe we need more diversity in our political offices as well.

Why not have more diversity in college basketball? How is it fair that the majority of the teams on my bracket are African American?
 
Folks, we've let this discussion go on for quite a while. While some of the posts have been positive, others have not. Regardless, this thread has outlived its usefulness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top