Why are the service academies so selective?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It's like a niche sports like lacrosse for a small segment of population
It's still not an easy entry and you still need to try out for a varsity team.

Academically highly selective kids don't choose service academies.

This is one of the dumber things I've read on DCUM, and that is saying something.

[Anonymous]

I think they are so selective b/c they seek more than just a bright kid. They are trying to divine from an application that intangible “ability to lead.” That’s why the overwhelming majority of cadets played varsity sports in high school, usually more than one, and more often than not was a team captain. They also focus on what I considered to be rather archaic, Boys Scouts and Boys State.

[Anonymous]

“Always” being after Vietnam.

No, "always" being ever since the country was created.

And yes, 20 somethings are less interested in the military lifestyle and constant war they grew up with. They used to sign up and know there was a CHANCE they’d go to war. I lived the life for 29 years and although the training, friendship, and service are valuable, I totally understand why current young people aren’t interested.

It's not the constant war so much as the pointlessness of the wars - fought for stupid reasons, using stupid methods, with no clear plan to win. Which are what our genius national security elite with expensive Ivy degrees has repeatedly gotten us into.

[Anonymous]

Lets's not bring the Marines into this. Crayons. Enough said.

The trope that Marines are stupid is extremely stupid. Enough said.

The reason a lot of southerners are in the military is that's where the bases are. It's normalized. A lot of families have members serving. It's less likely in New England or the West Coast, where there are comparatively fewer bases.

Southerners join the military because it is (or was) highly regarded in southern culture. You're getting it backwards - Southerners don't join the military because the bases are there, the bases are there because Southerners want to be in the military (especially the Army).

Pretty sure California took the most casualties in Iraq/Afghanistan. There's nothing special about southerners.

Because it's the biggest state, duh. The South was overrepresented in both service members and casualties in WW2, Korea, Vietnam, the GWOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, the service academies are so selective, because they have to be. One day they will have their finger on the proverbial or literal trigger. You want the smartest, toughest, of the highest character, who will not succumb to mental or physical presssure and flinch when the time comes to make that all important judgement call. It's life or death. Both awe inspiring and frightening to think that 22 year old graduates will have this responsibility.

But this isn't necessarily what they get. Just check the SAT scores and athletic event times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

“Always” being after Vietnam.

No, "always" being ever since the country was created.

And yes, 20 somethings are less interested in the military lifestyle and constant war they grew up with. They used to sign up and know there was a CHANCE they’d go to war. I lived the life for 29 years and although the training, friendship, and service are valuable, I totally understand why current young people aren’t interested.

It's not the constant war so much as the pointlessness of the wars - fought for stupid reasons, using stupid methods, with no clear plan to win. Which are what our genius national security elite with expensive Ivy degrees has repeatedly gotten us into.

This is on the nose

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“Always” being after Vietnam.

No, "always" being ever since the country was created.

And yes, 20 somethings are less interested in the military lifestyle and constant war they grew up with. They used to sign up and know there was a CHANCE they’d go to war. I lived the life for 29 years and although the training, friendship, and service are valuable, I totally understand why current young people aren’t interested.

It's not the constant war so much as the pointlessness of the wars - fought for stupid reasons, using stupid methods, with no clear plan to win. Which are what our genius national security elite with expensive Ivy degrees has repeatedly gotten us into.

Bush went to Yale. Rumsfeld went to Princeton. Trump went to Penn. Josh Hawley went to Stanford. DeSantis went to Harvard.

Elite schools are doing an awesome job educating really unpleasant people

At least the academies teach something useful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DH graduated #1 in his school class and was selected for both West Point and The Merchant Marine Academy. He chose the latter. He served in the reserves for 6 years but started with a DoD position directly after college, with 4 years of federal service already credited to him. Top-level clearance. His family was so poor he could never have dreamed of getting such a fabulous education completely for free.

The Merchant Marine Academy is often overlooked, but really does set one up for success.

Unless you're talking about a woman, then it sets you up for abuse and trauma.

Wut?

Google merchant marine rape. Sending women out to sea on cargo vessels by themselves ended exactly how you'd expect it to end, but they covered it up for years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

“Always” being after Vietnam.

No, "always" being ever since the country was created.

And yes, 20 somethings are less interested in the military lifestyle and constant war they grew up with. They used to sign up and know there was a CHANCE they’d go to war. I lived the life for 29 years and although the training, friendship, and service are valuable, I totally understand why current young people aren’t interested.

It's not the constant war so much as the pointlessness of the wars - fought for stupid reasons, using stupid methods, with no clear plan to win. Which are what our genius national security elite with expensive Ivy degrees has repeatedly gotten us into.

Agree. They have gotten into hundreds of years of freedom. Not sure what you are complaining about.

[Anonymous]

Something about the selectivity numbers- it's very hard to get Congressional letters of recommendation. And you can't have a completed application without that. So if you only use the completed application numbers, it doesn't show the kids who tried and failed to get congressional letters. It would show a high acceptance rate that is also artificial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Something about the selectivity numbers- it's very hard to get Congressional letters of recommendation. And you can't have a completed application without that. So if you only use the completed application numbers, it doesn't show the kids who tried and failed to get congressional letters. It would show a high acceptance rate that is also artificial.

This isn't exactly true, either. Children of certain servicemembers, for example, do not require congressional appointments (except for the USMMA). The USCGA doesn't require appointments at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“Always” being after Vietnam.

No, "always" being ever since the country was created.

And yes, 20 somethings are less interested in the military lifestyle and constant war they grew up with. They used to sign up and know there was a CHANCE they’d go to war. I lived the life for 29 years and although the training, friendship, and service are valuable, I totally understand why current young people aren’t interested.

It's not the constant war so much as the pointlessness of the wars - fought for stupid reasons, using stupid methods, with no clear plan to win. Which are what our genius national security elite with expensive Ivy degrees has repeatedly gotten us into.

Bush went to Yale. Rumsfeld went to Princeton. Trump went to Penn. Josh Hawley went to Stanford. DeSantis went to Harvard.

Elite schools are doing an awesome job educating really unpleasant people

At least the academies teach something useful

Right? They’re great at accepting sociopaths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something about the selectivity numbers- it's very hard to get Congressional letters of recommendation. And you can't have a completed application without that. So if you only use the completed application numbers, it doesn't show the kids who tried and failed to get congressional letters. It would show a high acceptance rate that is also artificial.

This isn't exactly true, either. Children of certain servicemembers, for example, do not require congressional appointments (except for the USMMA). The USCGA doesn't require appointments at all.

Those exceptions don't make the statement false. Most applicants can't get a presidential appointment and have to compete for a very limited number of congressional appointments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Published July 2023:

"The West Point Acceptance Rate originates from the total number of applicants that start files with the West Point Admissions team. This doesn’t include qualified candidates, only students who are interested in attending. They haven’t received a congressional nomination yet or gone through any of the admissions processes. From a recent class profile, this totals 12,294.

Since only 1,210 were admitted, this leads the public to believe that the admissions rate was 9.8%.

In reality, only 2,228 were qualified academically and in physical aptitude according to the admissions team. This results in a much higher acceptance rate of 54% if you are qualified."

Published where? How do they get away with this?

I don’t get it. First of all, get away with what, exactly? And secondly, it sounds like applicants are just effectively getting their “rejection letters” earlier in the process than at a typical college.

(AFAIK colleges don’t refuse to let you even apply if they don’t consider you qualified, they just don’t waste any time rejecting you. But please correct me if I am wrong!)

At a school for geniuses like Stanford, they have two key screening questions:

1) Can you fog a mirror?

2) Have you got $75?

If YES to both, you are qualified to apply!!!

Over at West Point they do things the stupid way which is:

1) Hey should we even bother reading this app if this kid can’t even pass the basic physical exam?

2) Maybe we should farm out pre-screening to Congress and let those clowns do all the work finding the best candidates from their area for us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Published July 2023:

"The West Point Acceptance Rate originates from the total number of applicants that start files with the West Point Admissions team. This doesn’t include qualified candidates, only students who are interested in attending. They haven’t received a congressional nomination yet or gone through any of the admissions processes. From a recent class profile, this totals 12,294.

Since only 1,210 were admitted, this leads the public to believe that the admissions rate was 9.8%.

In reality, only 2,228 were qualified academically and in physical aptitude according to the admissions team. This results in a much higher acceptance rate of 54% if you are qualified."

Published where? How do they get away with this?

I don’t get it. First of all, get away with what, exactly? And secondly, it sounds like applicants are just effectively getting their “rejection letters” earlier in the process than at a typical college.

(AFAIK colleges don’t refuse to let you even apply if they don’t consider you qualified, they just don’t waste any time rejecting you. But please correct me if I am wrong!)

At a school for geniuses like Stanford, they have two key screening questions:

1) Can you fog a mirror?

2) Have you got $75?

If YES to both, you are qualified to apply!!!

Over at West Point they do things the stupid way which is:

1) Hey should we even bother reading this app if this kid can’t even pass the basic physical exam?

2) Maybe we should farm out pre-screening to Congress and let those clowns do all the work finding the best candidates from their area for us?

You are a sad little bitter pill.

Stephen Hawking would not have been able to lead soldiers into combat for purely physiological reasons. Others can't because they don't have the sort of personality that inspires their peers to fight through adversity. And others - most others - put their own safety and well-being before any other concern or bigger picture idea.