US Army maximum age raised to 39

[Pekka]

yes, green card, permanent residency. Meaning you don't need any visas anymore. Almost citizen. To join the Army will not get you a green card though, so you will have to get that first and THEN go to the Army, which could take.. years. And thus my great American Foreign Legion will still only be a dream.

[Pekka]

and as for who I'd take, I'd take the one who shoots better in that situation.

[Ned]

Well, the point seems to have been made that a 40 year old man is at least as good, on the average, as a 20 year old girl when the going gets tough. Thus the army is not getting itself into further do do by raising the minimum age for joining.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kidicious
@ US military. How pitiful?!

Why is that? 75% of the Army is behind the front lines support type jobs (various supply, intelligence, vehicle mechanic, etc...) and I believe there are a lot of people in the civilian world who are 39 but still work in shipping, truck driving, or as an automachanic. You don't have to be a straping youth to do those.

[Az]

Which would you rather have in your company, a 40 year old male private or a 20 year old girl, when the enemy is coming in a human wave attack?

Depends on the 40 year old male and the 20 year old female. I've seen and personally known women that are fearsome warriors.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I wonder if Ned would have said that a 40 year old woman is at least as good in the military as a 20 year old boy?

[Pekka]

That's right. Plus plenty of fit 40 year olds. Even fit enough to combat. Plus they have many good sides to them that age has brought, but one troublesome thing is that would be of that age when they JOIN. So, that's the starting age in the army for them. But all in all, I have no problems with this, if they meet the requirements.

[Az]

Precisely, Pekka: meet the requirements -> get the job.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Az

Which would you rather have in your company, a 40 year old male private or a 20 year old girl, when the enemy is coming in a human wave attack?

Depends on the 40 year old male and the 20 year old female. I've seen and personally known women that are fearsome warriors.

No doubt. I think they may be equals. My point is not about the females, but about 40 year old privates.

[Kidlicious]

I'm sure a lot of 40 years olds willing to join up would be pretty lame.

[Ned]

On survivor this time there is a 41-year old firefighter who is dominating the competition phyiscally against all comers. The guy has white hair, for Gods sake; but he still has beaten all the 20-something studs in every competition.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I'm sure a lot of 40 years olds willing to join up would be pretty lame.

The problem, of course, is that they have to serve to 59 to get their pensions. Now, THAT may be a problem.

[Dis]

If a 40 year old can play professional basketball and american football (and they have), I think they can be in the army.

'nuff said.

[Pekka]

And my dad is over 60 and in better condition than half the 20 year olds in my school, and that's a fact. AND he's got bigger abs than I do. He is freaking ripped. However, he is also getting old, so would it mean he'd be good in the army? There are more things to being a good soldier than physical condition. The physical condition is the absolute minimum requirement, without it a person couldn't be even considered to be a good soldier.

When people get up in the age, they are more prone to injuries, they won't heal as quickly, and they might have developed procedured they won't give up. older people are more thinkers, so they might question more in their own heads, making them less effective than 20 year old meathead who is looking to kick ass, eat mud and ask no questions. 20 year old can grow and learn. 40 year old can do that too, but is not so potential anymore. 20 year olds rarely have their own families. 40 year olds often do.

etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

I still wouldn't oppose it, if they meet the initial requirements though. Why not. As long as there won't be too much adjustments by the Army to support the new challenge. The applicants must beat the challenge, not the other way around, and that's how it can work, and that's what they will do, so it's not a problem.

[ColdWizard]

Originally posted by Pekka
[blah blah blah about sexiness of Pekka's dad]
When people get up in the age, they are more prone to injuries, they won't heal as quickly,

Not necessarily different than an officer or enlisted man that's been in for 20.

and they might have developed procedured they won't give up. older people are more thinkers, so they might question more in their own heads

I'm sure that would be beaten out of them in basic if it proved to be a problem.

20 year olds rarely have their own families. 40 year olds often do.

Not necessarily different than an officer or enlisted man that's been in for 20 (except the pressures of payscale, perhaps).

I still wouldn't oppose it, if they meet the initial requirements though. Why not. As long as there won't be too much adjustments by the Army to support the new challenge. The applicants must beat the challenge, not the other way around, and that's how it can work, and that's what they will do, so it's not a problem.