ext_14009 ([identity profile] drewkitty.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] gridlore 2005-06-22 05:17 am (UTC)

So much for being clear. I was thinking of a "hypothetically racist" Army personnel classification system. I don't think that they are racist by any means. They have a mission to achieve and that would get in the way.

However, since you mention it, haven't you noticed that the GT scoring system is just as culturally biased as the SATs and other standardized tests? I will point out that its administration is slightly more fair, however. Also, who do you think sets the GT requirements for each MOS?

Again, to be painfully clear, the Army doesn't care what color a soldier is. This has been a very positive force for change in American society.

That doesn't mean that other national militaries (and certain American big city police agencies) don't play games with race and recruitment.

There are three basic infantry techniques taught by the U.S. special forces: the basic stuff they teach to partisans who might change sides next week, the good stuff we teach to our allies, and the really cool stuff that is strictly kept in house. I wouldn't imagine that we'd teach the latter in Basic to support troops.

For the record, the only crack I smoke is biological, not chemical in nature. Your snarkiness is fine by me, however.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org