The US army doubled its use of “moral waivers” for enlisted soldiers last year to cope with the demands of the Iraq war, allowing sex offenders, people convicted of making terrorist threats, and child abusers into the military…

The felons accepted into the army and marines included 87 soldiers convicted of assault or maiming, 130 convicted of non-cannabis-related drug offences, seven convicted of making terrorist threats, and two convicted of indecent behaviour with a child. Waivers were also granted to 500 burglars and thieves, 19 arsonists and nine sex offenders.

The new data were released by the oversight committee of the House of Representatives. Henry Waxman, the Democratic chairman of the oversight panel, said that while “providing opportunities to individuals who have served their sentences and rehabilitated themselves” is important, the waivers are a sign that the US military is stretched too thin…

More than one felony conviction disqualifies recruits from the army or marines, but the navy and air force can admit those with multiple offences.

Think we’d stop being “stretched too thin” if we didn’t invade countries under false pretenses?




  1. pat says:

    #30 – “Just knowing that someone other than the Chickenhawk-in-Chief will be sitting in the Oval Office goes half-way towards fixing the problem.”

    Don’t know. O’mama wants to attack Pakistan & Billary wants to nuke Iran…

  2. grog says:

    the president and vice president of our nation stand as proof positive that a draft will never actually put the sons and daughters of the people of privilege in harm’s way, get over that dream right now.

    #7 you’re a real creep. if my son or daughter volunteers to serve our nation in the military, i would like reasonable assurances that they won’t camped with a rapist or street thug, you dumb ass — do you lust for blood so badly that can really concede any care for our own soldiers’ safety just to satisfy your lust for death?

    the core fantasy that drives conservatives is this: that one day they themselves will be able to actually kill another human being and not only get away with it, but be considered a hero for it. the problem is that they are too cowardly to do it themselves, and that’s why get off on capital punishment and war. they are just violent people, itching for an excuse to see someone die.

  3. pat says:

    #32 – “the core fantasy that drives conservatives is is: ”

    Kinda like Clinton & O’mama?

  4. Mister Mustard says:

    #32 – You hit the nail right on the head. And I’d wager a bet that “pat” is one of those fantasizers. Too cowardly to put HIMSELF in harm’s way to kill, but drooling from his spittle-flecked chops at the thought of someone else doing it with his tax dollars.

  5. pat says:

    #34 Caught me dead to rights. LOL.

  6. Mister Mustard says:

    “the president and vice president of our nation stand as proof positive that a draft will never actually put the sons and daughters of the people of privilege in harm’s way,”

    Neither the “president” nor the “de facto president” has ever had a child that was subject to the draft. It’s been a volunteer Army for more than 30 years.

    Perhaps if there were the possibility that The Twins or the Carpet Muncher might be actually FIGHTING in the war that the Papi’s started, they might not have been so keen on starting a war in the first place.

    Certainly not a War With No Reason, like the Fucktard-in-Chief’s war.

    Worth a shot, anyway. How could it get any worse?

  7. Mister Mustard says:

    >>Caught me dead to rights. LOL.

    Sad to say, it’s true.

  8. RMR says:

    Sometimes the numbers don’t tell the whole story.
    I was an Army recruiter form 1999-2002. Laws vary from state to state in their category as to what constituted a felony. The DoD had to put together a defacto guidebook to categorize every law.
    I processed one felony to join the Army when I was a recruiter. A kid was in the back seat of a car that got pulled over. The cop searched the driver and he had rolling papers. Everyone in the car got a ticket for drug paraphernalia. Our guidebook mandated that this was a felony and had to be processed as such.

    Granted, I don’t believe this is the case with all the waivers and to be frank I rather not have the Army drop their standards to process I wasn’t allow to touch with a 10 foot pole when I was recruiting.

  9. RMR says:

    Sometimes the numbers don’t tell the whole story.
    I was an Army recruiter form 1999-2002. Laws vary from state to state in their category as to what constituted a felony. The DoD had to put together a defacto guidebook to categorize every law.
    I processed one felony to join the Army when I was a recruiter. A kid was in the back seat of a car that got pulled over. The cop searched the driver and he had rolling papers. Everyone in the car got a ticket for drug paraphernalia. Our guidebook mandated that this was a felony and had to be processed as such.

    Granted, I don’t believe this is the case with all the waivers and to be frank I rather not have the Army drop their standards to process what I wasn’t allow to touch with a 10 foot pole when I was recruiting.

  10. bobbo says:

    #32–Grog==you crack me up-assuming your reference to my post at #7 was not a mistake?

    Funny, because a straight reading of my post does not indicate my position at all, so, I am at a loss to figure out how that would make me a creep in your eyes, unless it is the accumulated resentment from several of my posts?

    Anyway, my post was made very much in the recognition of #38’s excellent post. The detailed truth of a matter is much more difficult to manage. Unfair rules are “always” easier to manage, and that’s why we have them.

  11. Lou says:

    Why is it every tidbit I hear about this war is lame.

  12. RBG says:

    32. Nice lefty fantasy Grog. Now wipe the spittle from your chin.

    RBG

  13. amodedoma says:

    I don’t get it. We got all these immigrants willing to risk their life-savings and their lives just for the chance to live illegally in the USA. So why not offer citizenship to those willing to fight for us. When I was in the US Navy back in the 80’s we had a huge number of Phillipine sailors that were there to get citizenship – some deal with Marcos I guess. Worked pretty good, ask anybody who’s served with them.
    On the other hand, sending the unwanted elements of society to war is and interesting way to prune the tree, so to speak.

  14. Steve-O says:

    #42 amodedoma – Or maybe we make it like Heinlein’s Starship Troopers and only people who have served get the right to vote and be a citizen.

    I served with a lot of those Phillipine sailors and yes, they served because they wanted to be citizens of the US.

  15. pat says:

    #43 – “When I was in the US Navy back in the 80’s we had a huge number of Phillipine sailors that were there to get citizenship – some deal with Marcos I guess. Worked pretty good, ask anybody who’s served with them.”

    They spoke English, most crawling across the border don’t and are hardly literate in Spanish.

    Remember how many civilian workers were at Subic and their level of English?

  16. JimD says:

    No reason that the Military should LAG BEHIND THE BUSH ADMISTRATION in the hiring of THE INDICTED, THE CONVICTED, OR THE PARDONED !!! It’s the way the REPUKES DO “BUSINESS” – IE: STEALING IN ALL DIRECTIONS !!!

  17. grog says:

    #36, um i meant that rich-boys g.w. and dick cheney got to avoid the draft in their day, not their children

    duh?

  18. grog says:

    #42 it’s not really a lefty fantasy.

    conservatives
    a.) support any and every war in which america engages
    b.) support death penalty
    c.) oppose gun control

    now go and read any conservative position piece on any of these topics and you will find that when conservatives feel that killing human beings is justified, they not only wholeheartedly support it, they feel it’s the right thing to do, even when innocents get killed in the crossfire, especially when they don’t have to do it themselves.

    it is a matter of fact and of public record.

    you will never hear a rush limbaugh or ann coulter ever express sympathy or remorse over innocent civilians being killed by accident, because to conservatives, that’s okay because, … wait for it … “they started it.”

  19. Angel H. Wong says:

    Let me understand this…

    You can’t join the us army if you’re a guy and likes to suck dick but it’s okay for you to join if you like to f*ck children?

  20. 888 says:

    #49

    describe “children”?

    I.e. for followers of “religion of peace” NINE year old female is already a woman (see Mohammad’s wife Aisha)… maybe they are US Army’s muslim soldiers?

  21. RBG says:

    48 Grog. Okay, show me where all… no… any conservative has no regrets over innocent civilians killed in any war.

    That your argument is your wishful thinking is self-evident.

    49. No, the laws now allow suckers of every description.

    50. 888. I don’t think US laws were invented yet. But if you were there…

    RBG


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 19696 access attempts in the last 7 days.