US Army Practicing Tolerance

[mrjarrell]

Yep. The dreaded "T" word. They've finally taken the decision that people with the will to serve should be allowed to serve, despite not meeting the Armies "stringent" standards. They're allowing guys who have pony tails, beards and carry knives in. Next thing you know they'll even be rescinding other ludicrous rules.

Quietly, US military opens up to Sikhs - Yahoo! News

 

[dross]

Yep. The dreaded "T" word. They've finally taken the decision that people with the will to serve should be allowed to serve, despite not meeting the Armies "stringent" standards. They're allowing guys who have pony tails, beards and carry knives in. Next thing you know they'll even be rescinding other ludicrous rules.

Quietly, US military opens up to Sikhs - Yahoo! News

Which rules of the U.S. Military do you consider ludicrous, Mr Jarrell?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Which rules of the U.S. Military do you consider ludicrous, Mr Jarrell?

I don't know about other services, but in the Marine Corps unit cohesion occurred because everyone had to conform to the same standard. Everyone had to give up some part of their individuality in order to be a member of the team.

We had Jewish guys that would attend synagouge on Saturday and would be at protestant worship on Sunday taking Communion from the same Roman Catholic Priest that led Jewish services the day before because they were part of the team. Many of us would attend temple with him. It helped each of us understand each other. Don't know what happens anymore.

One standard for one group, another standard for another, and pretty soon the things that bind you begin to separate you.

 

[mrjarrell]

Which rules of the U.S. Military do you consider ludicrous, Mr Jarrell?

Oh, mostly those that concern who can and cannot serve. We lose large numbers of honourably serving soldiers due to certain rules that are already being discussed in another thread.

 

[dross]

Oh, mostly those that concern who can and cannot serve. We lose large numbers of honourably serving soldiers due to certain rules that are already being discussed in another thread.

Oh. I was anticipating an anarchist military discussion.

 

[mrjarrell]

Oh. I was anticipating an anarchist military discussion.

Oh, yeah! Private militias! Let's roll! LOL.

 

[RichardR]

There is no unity in diversity.

 

[rambone]

Which rules of the U.S. Military do you consider ludicrous, Mr Jarrell?

Forced vaccinations. Not being able to keep & bear arms on base.

 

[CarmelHP]

Can we have a Sikh Regiment like the Brits had under the Raj? That would be cool.

 

[dross]

Forced vaccinations. Not being able to keep & bear arms on base.

Okay, okay. Just go and be all reasonable. Killjoys.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I usually do NOT appreciate the 'word' tolerance, mainly because in the West, is implies some foriegn or disgusting vice infringing it's will upon another.


However, I have zero problems with Sihks. Oddly enough, I think they're folkway represents what it ought to be, and is full of great warrior ethos; The fact that they have a bare-arms responsibility is very beautiful to me.

I do, however, wonder how this might effect Big Army and the espirit de corp; will this only effect sihks or will 'anyone' be allowed to join with a beard etc?

 

[Compatriot G]

Oh, mostly those that concern who can and cannot serve. We lose large numbers of honourably serving soldiers due to certain rules that are already being discussed in another thread.

I have seen you use this statement before. Do you have any particular statistics to go along with this statement?

 

[Loco179]

You know a lot of groups could help our country and bring honor to our military. I wish we would take up the Gurkha's as well being the Libs in the UK do not want them anymore. Sikh's have a tradition of loyality and honor. If they show it to us we should return that to them.

 

[Compatriot G]

I really don't have a problem with Sikhs. I know they are a warrior caste in India. The only thing I might point out is a bit of a minor problem with the beards. A gas mask may not seal up on a man's face if he has that much of a beard. This could be a life-threatening situation.

 

[jeremy]

Yep. The dreaded "T" word. They've finally taken the decision that people with the will to serve should be allowed to serve, despite not meeting the Armies "stringent" standards. They're allowing guys who have pony tails, beards and carry knives in. Next thing you know they'll even be rescinding other ludicrous rules.

Quietly, US military opens up to Sikhs - Yahoo! News

Old News... Very Old news...

I really don't have a problem with Sikhs. I know they are a warrior caste in India. The only thing I might point out is a bit of a minor problem with the beards. A gas mask may not seal up on a man's face if he has that much of a beard. This could be a life-threatening situation.

The Gas Mask will not seal at all with the beard. And it would be a Life-ending event...

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

Definitely a tough group of warriors to be respected

Baptised Sikhs are bound to wear the Five Ks (in Punjabi known as pañj kakkē or pañj kakār), or articles of faith, at all times. The tenth guru, Gobind Singh, ordered these Five Ks to be worn so that a Sikh could actively use them to make a difference to their own and to others' spirituality. The 5 items are: kēs (uncut hair), kaṅghā (small comb), kaṛā (circular iron bracelet), kirpān (dagger), and kacchā (special undergarment). The Five Ks have both practical and symbolic purposes.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism#cite_note-44

There are some admirable traits in Sikhism, and I would enjoy learning they're martial art verse the sterotypical asian art; However, I do not agree with they're "Universial" approach.
And a brief look into some beliefs, it would appear they have a hatred of "Caste" systems.

Again, I think they did a wonder for themselves.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Can we have a Sikh Regiment like the Brits had under the Raj? That would be cool.

I'll bet the Army couldn't muster a Sikh company.

 

[dross]

You gotta admire a belief system that requires being armed so you may defend the weak.

YouTube - Pulp Fiction Ending Scene (Diner)

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I'll bet the Army couldn't muster a Sikh company.

edit, interested point.



Do you think there is an agenda behind this?

 

[dross]

Integration is the key. Big Army doesnt want units seperated, even if it could mean better results overall.

I would support a fully Sikh Company, if the numbers were there, but then again, I might also fully accept "fully" *fill in the blank* Company, too.

Until then, I am surprised Big Army made exception, but I am curious where the line will be drawn in the sand, or if there is hidden agenda behind this.

Better results isn't always the highest goal.