A story out today on CNN discusses the arrest of five volunteers who are suspected of looting from Greensburg, Kansas.
No matter how "icky" we find the actions of these individuals, we must ask ourselves if this is the type of individuals we are attracting to serve in our armed forces now that we've lowered standards?
On Oct. 1, 2004, the New York Times reported the Army had lowered recruiting standards for the first time since 1998, when a strong economy was hurting recruiting efforts. Previously only eight percent of new recruits were allowed to have not graduated high school. The new standards allowed 10 percent to have skipped graduation. Also, more individuals who scored in the lowest acceptable range on service aptitude tests were to be allowed as new recruits.
In 2004 the Army National Guard missed its recruiting target of 56,000 soldiers by 5,000, according to the NY Times article. This marked the first shortfall in the Guard since 1994.
Deferred enlistments which typically account for 35 percent of the Army's recruiting goal each cycle, only amounted to 18 percent for 2005.
In June of 2005, the Guardian wrote about an internal memo sent to senior commanders about the growing dropout rate. The memo ordered battalion commanders to refer problem soldiers (drug abuse, poor fitness and pregnancy) up to brigade level before immediate dismissal.
This news followed an Army announcement that it was 6,659 soldiers short of its recruitment targets for year so far.
Then, in October of 2006, an Associated Press article ran in USA Today which announced the Army recruited more than 2,600 soldiers under new lower aptitude standards. The Army, under pressure for missing recruitment targets by the widest margin since 1979, lowered standards in an effort to ensure yearly totals for 2006 would have a better outcome. In addition to the lowered standards, the Army increased its number of recruiters and bonuses.
During the year, the Army recruited 7,000 more soldiers than in the previous year. Of the 80,635 total, roughly 70,000 were first time recruits who had never served previously. Of those new recruits, 3.8 percent scored below certain aptitude levels, according to the AP. Originally, the Army had only allowed 1.5 percent of recruits to score below those same levels. After the first standards lowering, this increased to 2 percent. After the recruitment shortfallings, however, this was increased to 4 percent.
An article which appeared this past February in International Herald Tribune brings it all home by announcing Defense Department records showed waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds grew nearly 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003
During that time the Army offered larger enlistment cash bonuses, allowed more high school dropouts and applicants with lower aptitude scores to join. In addition, weight and age restrictions were loosened.
According to the article, the sharpest increase in waivers were those for serious misdemeanors, which make up the bulk of all the Army's moral waivers. These include waivers for aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide. The number of waivers issued for felony convictions also increased, however, from 8 to 11 percent of the waivers granted in 2006.
It is of little wonder then why four volunteer soldiers would consider looting or other crimes. Chances are, it isn't the first time these individuals have broken the law in such a manner. The difference is this time they were able to use their military status and wardrobe to aid in the commission of the crime.
Perhaps more than anything else, the current state of our military speaks volumes on the status of our nation's foreign policy.
Leave a comment