Wow, AFA Losing Cadets!

Godandcounty....no problems. Its a very looooong thread and it's hard to know which of the many issues raised are the current focus.
 
Last edited:
Christcorp said:
Momba, I understand your question, but I feel that it's one of those things where you can't have it both ways. You said that your main concern isn't about who determines the proper training methods for the military or the academy. Your point was about where does "training" stop and hazing begin. Well, the "WHO" that is determining the "PROPER TRAINING METHODS" are the one who will determine "WHERE training stops and hazing begins".
Click to expand...

I did not ask to have this both ways. One of the good things about this forum is it has forced me to work on my communication skills. I have learned many things about wording, not just their dictionary meaning but their emotional meaning as well. I have also been reminded that context is sometimes everything. Perhaps I will have what it takes to write a best selling novel after all this :)

I was talking about if a cadre decided to purposefully target a cadet for his or her own personal reasons. The cadre did not say "yoo hoo, PP, I think we have a problem here. You want me to handle it using x, y, z.?" I am talking about a cadre who has a personal beef for whatever reason and goes about it on his own. Again, I can admit it is rare. But as cadre are human beings and a bad apple can get through from time to time (the recent drug arrest proves that), this is a possibility.

I think you and I agree that motive is everything. I do not believe that PP would authorize nor look the other way if a cadre went out of his way to personally break someone for personal reasons. Nor do I believe that PP would approve of the methods used by an power hungry cadre if it knew.

And as to breaking, do you agree there is a difference between breaking someone down to their basic fundamentals to bring them back up and breaking someone in order to break their will and make them give up?

Personally, I do have a great respect for the military and the people in the military. If I didn't, I would have done my best to discourage my son from heading off the the USAFA and I wouldn't be cheering him on from the sidelines. But I don't believe the fundamental nature of human beings change just because they enter the military. I believe that most who enter and stay are there for the right reasons and are decent human beings. I just believe that sometimes some rotten apples get in and can do some damage either to others or the reputation of the military before they are kicked out or leave. I believe that the military is probably far more angered and frustrated by bad apples than I am, and that they do what they can to stop the rotten from getting in. I am sure the military would love to have a bad apple test that everyone has to take upon application, sort of like a pregnancy test (ok, that analogy is a tad bit odd, but I have a warped sense of humor), which comes up red for good apple and brown for bad.
 
AlexT said:
Geez, I can't believe we're circling back to have this discussion again. You sound like somebody who either passed BCT or had a son/daughter pass BCT. If so, good for you. But you really aren't in a position to address the issue at hand unless either you/your dd/ds were maliciously targetted. I know, everybody says they're targeted. Um, no. You need to go back into this thread to re-read what was said.

In the three cases that I am aware of where specific trainees were targeted to get them to quit, the cadre did not believe these people were "academy material" not because of how they performed but because of who they were. The three trainees were all 1) women; 2) petite; 3) extremely high academic achievers (even by SA standards) and 4) participated in HS atheletics that were considered weak by their cadre (two swimmers one who competed in pistol target shooting). In a word, they didn't look like warriors. The Cadre who didn't take a shine to these cadets were all 1) men 2) had mediocre academic standing 3) participated in aggressive ball sports (and I don't mean tennis or golf) and combat sports. It was clear from their actions during summer training and afterwards that they believed that there was no room at the academy for people who weren't like them....real warriors.

These women weren't pushed/trained/punished to correct deficiencies. They were maliciously targeted to get them to quit. If they were deficient as cadets due to performance, there would have been administrative means of getting them out. Since the Cadre had no standing using this route, these cadets were targeted "by other means". All of them were able to take the physical punishments. It was after this did not work that the Cadre began individually isolating these trainees from their squadmates and company mates for "additional attention" I've detailed this earlier. As I said before, two dropped, one did not. Was it all for the best? Maybe, but it is still ugly and to pretend that it doesn't exist is unfair to all of those who really want to get an understanding of academy life beyond the glossy brochures and the rah! rah! speeches.
Click to expand...

I can absolutely believe everything you write but if you are there and observe that, don't you have an obligation? Something more than just typing it here?

This thread and the other about the cadet considering leaving could maybe try one's "patience." For all we know, folks speaking with like they are an authority at USAFA are in fact nothing of the sort. Perhaps they might even have the "patience" to graduate and get commissioned first before pronouncing why someone should or should not attend.

Whatever happened to integrity?
 
Last edited:
AlexT said:
HS atheletics that were considered weak by their cadre (two swimmers
Click to expand...

No wonder the cadre were below average academically. :) :) They are not too bright if they thought swimming was a weak sport. They should try sticking their face in water and swimming for three straight hours six days a week.
 
MemberLG said:
We can't define it. We can discuss back and forth and rediscuss things again and again, ultimately there are many things that are clearly "training" and clearly "hazing." Something in between is subjective.
Click to expand...

Whats that line "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." This reminded me of that.
We can identify extremes, but all the stuff in the middle, well I know it when I see it :)

(BTW, do you remember who said that, when and in what context? I think it was made famous by some member of congress.)
 
Kanye's Dad's Sock Puppet said:
I can absolutely believe everything you write but if you are there and observe that, don't you have an obligation? Something more than just typing it here?

This thread and the other about the cadet considering leaving could maybe try one's "patience." For all we know, folks speaking with like they an authority at USAFA are in fact nothing of the sort. Perhaps they might even have the "patience" to graduate and get commissioned first before pronouncing why someone should or should not attend.

Whatever happened to integrity?
Click to expand...

No, I was not there. I had no standing to report anything. As I've said earlier, one of the cadets did not drop and all of the dirty laundry came out in the wash afterwards through the academy's "social grape vine" after these events had transpired. (Again, this did not occur at AFA. I merely bring them up because the academy where they did occur had many of the same safeguards/procedures in place). These events were relayed to me afterwards by several cadets who witnessed it that were in the company where it took place, by the cadets who were subjected to the abuse as well classmates of the cadre who did the targeting. As far as I know, there was one report made up the chain of command while this was going on. While it resulted in "change" in certain cadre behaviour, it made the situation worse to some extent as the targeted cadets were isolated further as they were painted as unreliable "rats".
 
I mistakenly thought you were referencing incidents at USAFA this summer.


Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app
 
Godandcountry said:
I mistakenly thought you were referencing incidents at USAFA this summer.
Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app
Click to expand...

Sorry, my fault. I should have realized. It really is a very loooong thread. I only got involved (way back when) when another poster indicated that something like this happened and was strongly rebuked by folks claiming that it could never happen...that there were too many safeguards in place. While I respect AFA and all of the SA's, I do believe that it can happen at any SA and also at schools like VMI and the Citadel. I think that it is indeed very rare, which is why hardly anybody here believes it happens. For the vast majority - what is described doesn't comport with their own reality, so they question these claims.
 
AlexT said:
No, I was not there. I had no standing to report anything. As I've said earlier, one of the cadets did not drop and all of the dirty laundry came out in the wash afterwards through the academy's "social grape vine" after these events had transpired. (Again, this did not occur at AFA. I merely bring them up because the academy where they did occur had many of the same safeguards/procedures in place). These events were relayed to me afterwards by several cadets who witnessed it that were in the company where it took place, by the cadets who were subjected to the abuse as well classmates of the cadre who did the targeting. As far as I know, there was one report made up the chain of command while this was going on. While it resulted in "change" in certain cadre behaviour, it made the situation worse to some extent as the targeted cadets were isolated further as they were painted as unreliable "rats".
Click to expand...

Sorry Alex. I knew you were not referencing an event at USAFA. My lack of patience was with others.
 
MombaBomba said:
Whats that line "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." This reminded me of that.
We can identify extremes, but all the stuff in the middle, well I know it when I see it :)

(BTW, do you remember who said that, when and in what context? I think it was made famous by some member of congress.)
Click to expand...

It was US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart discussing pornography.
 
AlexT said:
It was clear from their actions during summer training and afterwards that they believed that there was no room at the academy for people who weren't like them....real warriors.
Click to expand...

My poor attempt at humor - I didn't realize we can use Air Force Academy and "warriors" in a same sentence. Than again there was a proposal to create a medal for drone pilots.
 
MemberLG said:
My poor attempt at humor - I didn't realize we can use Air Force Academy and "warriors" in a same sentence. Than again there was a proposal to create a medal for drone pilots.
Click to expand...
Ouch! That one left a mark:)
 
MemberLG said:
AlexT said:
It was clear from their actions during summer training and afterwards that they believed that there was no room at the academy for people who weren't like them....real warriors.
Click to expand...

My poor attempt at humor - I didn't realize we can use Air Force Academy and "warriors" in a same sentence. Than again there was a proposal to create a medal for drone pilots.
Click to expand...

You beat me to this one. I chuckled when I read it, the closest warriors to USAFA are 30 minutes south
 
AlexT said:
In the three cases that I am aware of where specific trainees were targeted to get them to quit, the cadre did not believe these people were "academy material" not because of how they performed but because of who they were. The three trainees were all 1) women; 2) petite; 3) extremely high academic achievers (even by SA standards) and 4) participated in HS atheletics that were considered weak by their cadre (two swimmers one who competed in pistol target shooting). In a word, they didn't look like warriors. The Cadre who didn't take a shine to these cadets were all 1) men 2) had mediocre academic standing 3) participated in aggressive ball sports (and I don't mean tennis or golf) and combat sports. It was clear from their actions during summer training and afterwards that they believed that there was no room at the academy for people who weren't like them....real warriors.

These women weren't pushed/trained/punished to correct deficiencies. They were maliciously targeted to get them to quit. If they were deficient as cadets due to performance, there would have been administrative means of getting them out. Since the Cadre had no standing using this route, these cadets were targeted "by other means". All of them were able to take the physical punishments. It was after this did not work that the Cadre began individually isolating these trainees from their squadmates and company mates for "additional attention" I've detailed this earlier.
Click to expand...

Wow! I was almost rendered speechless! I have been content just to follow this thread for the last 23 pages weighing everyone's opinion and comments until now. Call me naive, but I thought all that macho man stuff was beyond the military in this day and age. All I can do is shake my head. Those cadre who picked on those women were definitely on a jealous power trip and I hope they were reprimanded.

Sounds to me like they were the exact definition of the "bully" that this entire thread has been talking about. Their actions were way over the line and did not offer one ounce of beneficial training or instruction for those cadets. They were not and probably will never be good leaders and I am a firm believer in "what goes around, comes around" and I hope they got theirs ten-fold. In my twenty years in the Navy, I never saw any such behavior from any enlisted or officer personnel that I worked with. I would be embarrassed to even call them comrade. I am comforted to know that it is not the norm.
 
Last edited:
FalconsRock said:
Wow! I was almost rendered speechless! I have been content just to follow this thread for the last 23 pages weighing everyone's opinion and comments until now. Call me naive, but I thought all that macho man stuff was beyond the military in this day and age. All I can do is shake my head. Those cadre who picked on those women were definitely on a jealous power trip and I hope they were reprimanded.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it does still happen, but I don't think its as pervasive as it used to be. From what my DD has said, it seemed that the issue was more with the males in her class. Last year the cadre of one squadron pulled aside a group of boys for "additional training" while they were told that "the women have earned the right and deserve to be here as much as you!" In this case - kudos to the cadre! They did absolutely the right thing. In my DD's squadron, the young ladies had put up with the boys as well. Again, this was not from the cadre. After proving herself last year, the attitudes have changed toward her, but girls really do have to do so much more to gain that respect.

This article probably explains what young ladies have to endure better than anything else I've ever read.
http://www.deanbaker.org/2015/08/women-soldiers.html
http://www.deanbaker.org/2015/08/women-soldiers.html
 
I'm amazed this is an issue at AFA... An academy that has had women longer than it hasn't. I don't remember this being an issue at CGA and we had something like 75-100 years more history.... Most of which was without women.
 
LineInTheSand said:
I'm amazed this is an issue at AFA... An academy that has had women longer than it hasn't. I don't remember this being an issue at CGA and we had something like 75-100 years more history.... Most of which was without women.
Click to expand...

LITS, the girls just don't talk about it. If they do, they are viewed as weak. I know DD never said a thing to the cadre (or any upperclassman) about it. The girls did grumble to each other, though. On top of that, girls tend to be harder on other girls because they know they are judged more harshly than the boys. That article I posted is dead on. Of course, this isn't something only seen at the Academies.
 
You parents are really lucky to have such informative and precise talks with your cadets. I never got a whole lot of details from mine.
 
-Bull- said:
You beat me to this one. I chuckled when I read it, the closest warriors to USAFA are 30 minutes south
Click to expand...
There are some serious operators at Carson, no doubt.

At least when I was a cadet, there was at least one Silver Star recipient working at USAFA. Sgt. Vance earned it on top of Robert's Ridge.
Certainly the AF and DoD tend to cheapen the word "warrior" by over use, but they do exist in all of the services.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top