• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report says too many whites, men leading military

jamesrage

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
It looks like the race and gender parasites want to use the military for some bull **** PC agenda.



Report says too many whites, men leading military - Yahoo! News
WASHINGTON – The U.S. military is too white and too male at the top and needs to change recruiting and promotion policies and lift its ban on women in combat, an independent report for Congress said Monday.

Seventy-seven percent of senior officers in the active-duty military are white, while only 8 percent are black, 5 percent are Hispanic and 16 percent are women, the report by an independent panel said, quoting data from September 2008.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jamesrage said:
It looks like the race and gender parasites want to use the military for some bull **** PC agenda.

Report says too many whites, men leading military - Yahoo! News
WASHINGTON – The U.S. military is too white and too male at the top and needs to change recruiting and promotion policies and lift its ban on women in combat, an independent report for Congress said Monday.

Seventy-seven percent of senior officers in the active-duty military are white, while only 8 percent are black, 5 percent are Hispanic and 16 percent are women, the report by an independent panel said, quoting data from September 2008.

One barrier that keeps women from the highest ranks is their inability to serve in combat units. Promotion and job opportunities have favored those with battlefield leadership credentials.

The report ordered by Congress in 2009 calls for greater diversity in the military's leadership so it will better reflect the racial, ethnic and gender mix in the armed forces and in American society.

Efforts over the years to develop a more equal opportunity military have increased the number of women and racial and ethnic minorities in the ranks of leadership. But, the report said, "despite undeniable successes ... the armed forces have not yet succeeded in developing a continuing stream of leaders who are as diverse as the nation they serve."

"This problem will only become more acute as the racial, ethnic and cultural makeup of the United States continues to change," said the report from the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, whose more than two dozen members included current and former military personnel as well as businessmen and other civilians.

Having military brass that better mirrors the nation can inspire future recruits and help create trust among the general population, the commission said.

Among recommendations is that the military eliminate policies that exclude women from combat units, phasing in additional career fields and units that they can be assigned to as long as they are qualified. A 1994 combat exclusion policy bans women from being assigned to ground combat units below the brigade level even though women have for years served in combat situations.
Click to expand...

Not sure how to comment on this, unless I have some more information.

1) What is the breakdown of recruits, by race?

2) How does that compare to the breakdown of officer candidates by race?

3) Out of those who apply to be officers, what percentage have a college education? This answer usually should be "all of them", but I would ask this question to clarify.

4) Out of those who apply to be officers, AND BECOME OFFICERS, what is the breakdown by race? (This is a control question, used to reveal racism within the ranks, if it exists, and would be a fairly accurate indicator of whether there IS actual racism within the military, as a whole)

5) Here is the key - What is the breakdown of people with college degrees, by race?

I would submit that, if the answers to these questions are what I would expect them to be, and also knowing that a college education is very, very expensive, then the issue here should not be about possible discrimination in the military, which was implied by the paper, but about the lack of opportunity for the poor to get a good college education. And, knowing that minorities comprise a higher percentage of poor people than rich or middle class persons, we would now have our answer - The report excluded data which would show the real reason that minorities comprise such a low percentage of officers. Therefore, the paper would be flawed, and probably is, because it implies racism when the real culprit is people not being able to go to college due to a lack of money, which would not be the military's fault at all. This would be another issue entirely, which should be debated on it's own merits.

Based on what I have already stated, I would once more submit that, if the answers to the questions I posed are what I expect them to be, then the conclusion of the paper is completely flawed, because it relied on flawed data, or incomplete data, from which to draw it's conclusions.
 
Last edited:
Less diversity in the top ranks should probably indicate less diversity overall (if it doesn't that may raise troubling implications). If there is not much diversity in the army in general, the army needs to increase its efforts to recruit in new markets - not because diversity itself is important, but because the greater number of individuals the army attracts, the more quality servicemen we will end up with.
 
I remember when women wanted to be on the Fire Department in San Diego way back in the early 70s so what did they do? They lowered the physical requirements to allow women to pass the agility tests.

I later saw the requirements for colleges lowered to allow for the under educated people who lack the mental acuity to make it in. Since then the standards at every level of education have been diluted and the education system has gone to hell.

This BS if allowed will do the same thing to our military. We have minorities in positions of authority because they earned it, like Colon Powell and Lieutenant Colonel Allen B. West just elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Neither of these men had to have the standards or requirements lowered for them because they worked hard and didn't listen to the bovine scatology about how they need a break because they we oppressed or some other nonsense.

This kind od crap is exactly what I have been saying we as Conservatives Independents, and Librarians ned to stand shoulder to shoulder and say enough of this P.C. B.S.
 
The military and military leadership being predominantly male is a good thing. A society that loses any significant portion of its young female population is in danger of demographic crisis. A society that doesn't have the good sense to protect its women and keep them out of combat to the best of their ability is on the path to destruction. We understand this on an instinctual level, based on our collective response to female casualties.

As for the military being predominantly white, maybe if the liberals didn't spend so damn much time whining about "the poor man dying in the rich man's wars", more minority men would see the military as the career and educational opportunity that it is.
 
My God.... Give this PC, affirmative action crap a break for Christ's sake.
 
My XO on the Inchon, was a great guy, happened to be black. Last Chief on the Inchon? Hispanic, the best Lt. I worked with? Female.

Worst Chiefs? 2 at NAS Corpus right after I joined, both were part of a "push" for female leaders in the Navy, and both were absolutely USELESS.

Wait, give it a few years...

"Too many heterosexuals in leadership positions..."
 
Here's an idea.

A crazy idea.

But an idea.

How about we put race aside.

And put people in charge that will be good at their jobs... Regardless of their race... And if It happens to be too much one way or the other... Oh well :shrug:
 
The Military is diverse. Also Vicchio the Inchon is a good name for a ship. =)
 
Jetboogieman said:
Here's an idea.

A crazy idea.

But an idea.

How about we put race aside.

And put people in charge that will be good at their jobs... Regardless of their race... And if It happens to be too much one way or the other... Oh well :shrug:
Click to expand...

It's a shoot but may be the only shoot we got.=)

Spoken like a ture Star Fleet Officer. =)
 
cpgrad08 said:
It's a shoot but may be the only shoot we got.=)

Spoken like a ture Star Fleet Officer. =)
Click to expand...

For you :)

STARFLEET_Marine_Corps_300.jpg
 
Thanks that means a lot but they got nothing on... =)

uscm_poster-p228219803290379086t5wm_400.jpg
 
But this is the best...

250px-Imperial-recruitment-poster.jpg
 
Jetboogieman said:
That's not fair. If there's anything in Star Trek that's gay, it's this:

403742-92088-wesley-crusher_large.jpg


Leave Sulu alone.
Click to expand...

Hey just sayin!

That's the NEXT gay generation. :lol:
 
Before we come to any conclusions I think someone needs to figure out WHY this phenomenon exists.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Before we come to any conclusions I think someone needs to figure out WHY this phenomenon exists.
Click to expand...

I think it may have something to do with this...

 
Viktyr Korimir said:
The military and military leadership being predominantly male is a good thing. A society that loses any significant portion of its young female population is in danger of demographic crisis. A society that doesn't have the good sense to protect its women and keep them out of combat to the best of their ability is on the path to destruction. We understand this on an instinctual level, based on our collective response to female casualties.

As for the military being predominantly white, maybe if the liberals didn't spend so damn much time whining about "the poor man dying in the rich man's wars", more minority men would see the military as the career and educational opportunity that it is.
Click to expand...

You and I agree on a lot of things, Kori, but this is where I totally disagree with you. A lot of minorities already exist in the military and it has nothing to do with the "poor man dying in the rich man's wars," but it also can't be denied that the policymakers who end up sending our troops to war, and society in general, are divorced from the realities of the sacrifices and tough existence that many servicemen/women have to go through. I think this is a huge problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom