Skip to comments.
Uncle Sam might not want you (Army deems most unqualified to serve)
Wichita Eagle ^
| 3/13/06
| PAULINE JELINEK
Posted on 03/16/2006 5:19:05 PM PST by Libloather
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
To: Scotsman will be Free
And saying that young people who are pierced or tatooed were probably raised by pagans isn't?
41
posted on
03/16/2006 8:48:41 PM PST
by
Lunatic Fringe
(Olfrygt: the nagging fear of being unable to find beer while out of town.)
To: dancusa; gondramB
My dad, a WW2 USN vet had a huge tattoo on his arm after a wild night in Hawaii. He always had a laugh when telling the story. "It wasn't that big in the book!"
42
posted on
03/16/2006 11:12:16 PM PST
by
endthematrix
(None dare call it ISLAMOFACISM!)
To: Lunatic Fringe
Have you taken your medication today? Nitro, beta-blocker, statin--check, check, check.
yep, thanks for caring.
43
posted on
03/17/2006 4:05:49 AM PST
by
patriciaruth
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1562436/posts)
To: Eagle Eye
That may have changed in the last 18 years, but when my husband was in the Army, in the late 80's, a strict weight number was what they went by. My husband has been overweight his whole life, he was able to make the top part of the weight guidelines to get in, but he was unable to maintain it. He never failed a physical, and in PT he was constantly the #1 or #2 finisher. About 3 years into his 4 year commitment, the Army started a draw down of personnel. Things like no more reenlistment bonuses, no huge incentive to reenlist, etc. They also went back to their strict weight limits, so although my husband still met PT requirements he no longer met weight requirements so they stopped all his "perks". He could no longer take leave.
His last year in the service was miserable, and he did not reenlist.
44
posted on
03/17/2006 4:17:22 AM PST
by
codercpc
To: caisson71
Other factors include:
" The rising rate of obesity; some 30 percent of U.S. adults are now considered obese.
A decline in physical fitness.
A near-epidemic rise in the use of Ritalin and other stimulants to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Potential recruits are ineligible for military service if they have taken such a drug in the previous year."
They also weed out those with criminal records and those with histories of drug use.
45
posted on
03/17/2006 6:14:13 AM PST
by
Wristpin
("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
To: Lunatic Fringe
Read her post again. She did not state that or imply it.
To: fso301
Tatoos on a lady are no different that dents on a brand new Mercedes... tramp stamps...!
47
posted on
03/17/2006 6:43:28 AM PST
by
martin gibson
(I know not what course others may take, but as for myself, give me Ralph Stanley or give me death!!!)
To: FreedomCalls
The Navy banned tongue splitting like that freak has a few years ago.
48
posted on
03/17/2006 7:04:11 AM PST
by
Wristpin
("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
To: fso301
It tends to filter out criminal elements. The ban on convicted felons tends to accomplish that a little better.
49
posted on
03/17/2006 7:21:42 AM PST
by
Drew68
To: Drew68
The ban on convicted felons tends to accomplish that a little better.Lot's of 17-18 year old criminals who either haven't been convicted of anything serious or, had juvenile records that were expunged.
That having been said, there is a long tradition of judges giving a young man in a legal jam having an otherwise clean felony record two choices, join the military or go to jail. My comments weren't so much about the person with one or two tatoos as they were about the 17 year old who shows up at the recruiting station festooned with tatoos.
Furthermore, rules are rules, orders are orders. If a recruit is unwilling to have a tatoo removed as a pre-condition for signing up, how likely will that soldier be to follow orders?
50
posted on
03/17/2006 7:41:40 AM PST
by
fso301
To: fso301
A female who has tattooes is no lady.
To: Libloather
tatoos? Wouldn't that mean these folks would be easily led? While they may not be leaders, everyone cannot be a leader.
To: fso301
tatoos and lady are inconsistent.
To: School of Rational Thought
tatoos and lady are inconsistent.Very true. The two are mutually exclusive.
54
posted on
03/17/2006 7:55:39 AM PST
by
fso301
To: Wristpin
It must make it hard to eat soup without dribbling.
To: gondramB
They have to drop that rule if they ever institute a draft or everybody who wants to dodge will get ink.Or smoke a joint.
56
posted on
03/17/2006 8:08:32 AM PST
by
flada
(Posting in a manner reminiscent of Jen-gis Kahn.)
To: fso301
Tatoos on a lady are no different that dents on a brand new Mercedes.I was looking at a tattooed lady the other day and I thought, I don't mind if she has tats, as long as she doesn't mind if I think of her as a sideshow freak, and not quite fully human. And NEVER as a lady.
57
posted on
03/17/2006 8:13:02 AM PST
by
Flavius Josephus
(War today is always cheaper than war tomorrow.)
To: patriciaruth
I always figure I've marked my body up plenty, quite by accident, and I don't need to start doing it intentionally.
58
posted on
03/17/2006 8:19:28 AM PST
by
Flavius Josephus
(War today is always cheaper than war tomorrow.)
To: fso301
...dents on a brand new Mercedes.
**
Dirty dents
59
posted on
03/17/2006 8:20:14 AM PST
by
Bigg Red
(Never trust Democrats with national security.)
To: Wallace T.
If She Tattoos, She'll Do You!
60
posted on
03/17/2006 8:21:27 AM PST
by
Flavius Josephus
(War today is always cheaper than war tomorrow.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson