4 ms·
Re: jumping in particular, my point is more nuanced: that we train too many paratroopers and also there are too many dangerous jumps for which the readiness ROI
by InefficientRed 4y ago
Re: jumping in particular, my point is more nuanced: that we train too many paratroopers and also there are too many dangerous jumps for which the readiness ROI isn't worth the additional injuries.
Those two are related and form a vicious cycle. The more people you injure, the the more you have train. The more jumps you require for minimal readiness, the more folks eventually refuse to re-up to even leave the Army as they watch their friends drop like flies to spinal injuries.
Jumps, and dangerous jumps in particular, are a huge point of contention in the Army because the Army likes to screw soldiers by claiming that spinal injuries from jumps aren't service-related.
Then there's a really long tail of physical fitness training that has more to do with macho signalling than actual readiness. Plenty of discussion down-thread.
There is nuance and trade-off, but there's a LOT of training in the military that does little or nothing for readiness and contributes massively to injury rates. I think the Army is so far to the "stupid" end of that spectrum that the nuanced conversation doesn't make much sense to me.