The changes to the Army fitness test are wrecking the Army, and are entirely caused by two things- admitting women, and admitting out of shape pussies, as most of our youth are today, without forcing them to actually get into fighting shape. That’s how you get shit like this:
2 Comments
DTG · April 3, 2021 at 3:44 pm
Exactly right…. same thing’s going on to one degree or another in all branches.
Sarin · April 4, 2021 at 12:23 pm
Meh, spent 20 years in the .mil. Food blisters like that crop up more often in the reserves from what I saw. It’s the nature of being a part time member of the .mil… It’s bound to happen when you’re subject to standards 1x weekend/month and 2x weeks/year. We had them on active duty too. Most of them were the “sick, lame and lazy” BAS commandos that always “got hurt” right before a scheduled test.
Not sure that the ACFT is a bad idea overall. In ‘08, Marine Corps adopted the CFT as a supplemental PT test. After lots of testing and tweaking, they mandated both the PFT and CFT. CFT was interesting when it first came out. Way different from the PFT. Required a different skill set. Also was stupid simple from an equipment perspective. Place to run, medium sized patch of grass, some ammo cans filled with sand (weighing 30lbs), some cones and a dummy grenade.
Reading the comments in the article was fascinating and demonstrative of a certain mindset in the Army that was not (at least that I was aware of) prevalent in the Marines. Namely: that there should be different standards based on the MOS. Comments ranged from “admin kids don’t need to be as fit” to, “it’s anti-woman and further perpetuation of ‘jocks’ ruling the roost…” I admit, I don’t fully understand that mentality, since we aren’t fighting a WWII style battle with a clearly defined FLOT, “front” and “rear” areas. In an asymmetric war, anywhere is a viable target, the softer, the better… I just don’t get the “we need different standards” aspect to the argument in the comments. If that’s the case, why aren’t Combat Arms MOS’ in the army paid a princely sum as compared to the REMFs that “aren’t in harm’s way?” Fobbits of the same rank as me got paid the exact same Family Separations Allowance and Hazardous Duty/Imminent Danger Pay sitting in Kuwait lounging by the pool as I did when in the middle of Phantom Fury in Fallujah ‘04. If they’re going to advocate for different standards based on perceived lack of exposure to danger, perhaps they’d agree to less pay, with the difference going to the shooters? Methinks not.
Comments are closed.