Well, they obviously do need to be fit for the job, hence Trump’s mental decline being even more concerning than his original mental state. Given the lack of fit Americans interested in enlistment you might also think a bit of leading by example couldn’t hurt. And of course, I’d hate to be a National Guard member in an administrative role sent home for optics when I didn’t need to be physically fit to perform my job.
Are you trying to have a “gotcha” moment here? You’re arguing with yourself. You’ve already stated the commander in chief doesn’t need to be physically fit to serve, and I’ve not disagreed, and already stated that their mental state is of much more concern to me.
I don’t think we’re going to have a meaningful conversation on something quite as nuanced as leading by example, so let’s just call that one a mulligan.
Anyone in the National Guard has already met the organization’s standards, and moves by the presidential administration to change those standards as a direct response to bad optics are obviously done to improve the optics
I disagree with most things you’ve just said. I agree that there’s no mental PT test, but I disagree with the concept of writing something that dumb. And I’ll end on this point: it’s a sad state of affairs when the nation can’t find enough fit individuals to fill out its military branches and the response is “it’s about time” instead of “wow, we need to make some serious changes.”
Well, they obviously do need to be fit for the job, hence Trump’s mental decline being even more concerning than his original mental state. Given the lack of fit Americans interested in enlistment you might also think a bit of leading by example couldn’t hurt. And of course, I’d hate to be a National Guard member in an administrative role sent home for optics when I didn’t need to be physically fit to perform my job.
“Do need to be fit”
So FDR was fit in his wheelchair when he won WWII?
Seriously, military leadership and civilian are wildly different.
“Optics”
It’s standards and discipline, not optics. Can’t meet the standard, tough shit.
You know the difference, so you’re just nagging.
Are you trying to have a “gotcha” moment here? You’re arguing with yourself. You’ve already stated the commander in chief doesn’t need to be physically fit to serve, and I’ve not disagreed, and already stated that their mental state is of much more concern to me.
I don’t think we’re going to have a meaningful conversation on something quite as nuanced as leading by example, so let’s just call that one a mulligan.
Anyone in the National Guard has already met the organization’s standards, and moves by the presidential administration to change those standards as a direct response to bad optics are obviously done to improve the optics
“Gotcha”
Nope, just wanted to make sure we agree that the folks talking about Trump needing to be in good physical shape as CiC are silly.
“Mental”
Sure but that’s not a military standard. Theres no mental PT test.
“Leading by example”
That’s in the military, like how Milley should have. Civilian leadership physical fitness doesn’t matter.
“NG”
And if they fall out of those standards, or can’t meet the current standards, can be kicked out.
We all know this, it’s not new and it’s entirely appropriate. If anything, this is long overdue.
The CIC is a civilian role, so military standards are irrelevant.
I disagree with most things you’ve just said. I agree that there’s no mental PT test, but I disagree with the concept of writing something that dumb. And I’ll end on this point: it’s a sad state of affairs when the nation can’t find enough fit individuals to fill out its military branches and the response is “it’s about time” instead of “wow, we need to make some serious changes.”
Cool, that first part was just an insult.
“Fill out”
Actually, recruiting has surged since the election.
Turns out the kind of folks who are willing to join the military want to join the military, not a fat camp.
And yes, we’ve been begging to get back to real standards for years.