Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

That's like saying that after Harvard and University Toledo grads are in the workforce for 5 years, no one cares where they went to college anymore. Patently untrue, bordering on absurd.

I explained in my blurb why you can't compare

Let's do this

Black Guy: Morehouse College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years as a Naval Cyber Warfare Officer

White Guy: Harvard College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years in Middle Management at Google

who gets the job?

The one who knows your neighbor and/or peer

But the Morehouse grad had to put his life on the line to compete with the Harvard grad

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

That's like saying that after Harvard and University Toledo grads are in the workforce for 5 years, no one cares where they went to college anymore. Patently untrue, bordering on absurd.

I explained in my blurb why you can't compare

Let's do this

Black Guy: Morehouse College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years as a Naval Cyber Warfare Officer

White Guy: Harvard College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years in Middle Management at Google

who gets the job?

The one who knows your neighbor and/or peer

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

That's like saying that after Harvard and University Toledo grads are in the workforce for 5 years, no one cares where they went to college anymore. Patently untrue, bordering on absurd.

I explained in my blurb why you can't compare

Let's do this

Black Guy: Morehouse College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years as a Naval Cyber Warfare Officer

White Guy: Harvard College - BS in Computer Science + 5 Years in Middle Management at Google

who gets the job?

Anonymous wrote:the academies aren’t Harvard or Yale.Getting into an Ivy really does give you a leg up in the private sector. Goldman, McKinsey, Big Law, Silicon Valley—they all recruit heavily from those schools and the name brand opens doors. A state school grad with the same GPA and resume is starting behind. That’s why those admissions battles are so cutthroat.The service academies are completely different. Their only job is to produce military officers. A brand-new 2nd Lieutenant or Ensign from West Point has the exact same starting pay, job, and career path as someone commissioned through ROTC at a random state school, an HBCU, or straight out of OCS. The military doesn’t give extra points for having gone to Annapolis.

You’re all in the same boat. The troops these officers lead—the enlisted force—are already way more diverse and look a lot more like America than the officer corps does. Unless someone is actually proposing we scrap ROTC and OCS completely and make the academies the only way to become an officer—which nobody is—then why single out the academies and strip away their ability to build a more representative class? ROTC and OCS will keep producing diverse officers because they draw from a much wider pool of colleges.


You’d just be making one small commissioning source less diverse while the majority stay the same.The military itself keeps saying a diverse officer corps is essential for unit cohesion, recruitment, retention, and national security. The academies are a tiny fraction of total officers, but they punch above their weight in producing senior leaders 20-30 years down the road.So yeah, I think the academies should keep using race-conscious admissions (within whatever narrow lane the Court left open for national security reasons) to look more like the country. Otherwise we’re just making the problem worse for no reason.

The bolded statements in the first paragraph are just wrong, which you implicitly concede in the bolded statement in the final paragraph.

Regardless, as a PP pointed out, the service academies are highly selective undergraduate institutions, and should be treated as such.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

You are uninformed.

Graduates of the three main service academies are highly sought after by employers in both the public and private sectors once their full commitment is complete and the officers are given an Honorable Discharge.

Forbes ranks undergraduate institutions by earnings of graduates 10 years after graduation; the USNA & the USMA are near the top in earnings as revealed in this ranking. USAFA grads also do well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

That's like saying that after Harvard and University Toledo grads are in the workforce for 5 years, no one cares where they went to college anymore. Patently untrue, bordering on absurd.

Don't any of you read the news? This isn't even a thing anymore.

Anonymous wrote:They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Prestigious to who? You have to serve as an officer for 5 years, no future employer really cares where you went to undergraduate college after where were a Naval Officer for 5 years, they'll ask you more questions about being a Naval Officer than your 4 years at Annapolis

They are selective colleges, regardless of the commission at the end. Like you pointed, it doesn’t make a difference to the overall racial breakdown of total military officers since there are multiple pathways to becoming an officer. But a degree from West Point is significantly more prestigious than a degree from University of Toledo. They rightly should stop AA.

Anonymous wrote:Look at the books they removed from the Academies' libraries

The Secretary of War thought they didn’t belong. Tells you all you need to know know about their priorities

+1

Look at the books they removed from the Academies' libraries

The Secretary of War thought they didn’t belong. Tells you all you need to know know about their priorities

OP, I think you're preaching to the choir.

Who the heck gets up on a Tuesday morning and pens something like this? I don't think you are a local mom or dad at all

Sack

the academies aren’t Harvard or Yale.Getting into an Ivy really does give you a leg up in the private sector. Goldman, McKinsey, Big Law, Silicon Valley—they all recruit heavily from those schools and the name brand opens doors. A state school grad with the same GPA and resume is starting behind. That’s why those admissions battles are so cutthroat.The service academies are completely different. Their only job is to produce military officers. A brand-new 2nd Lieutenant or Ensign from West Point has the exact same starting pay, job, and career path as someone commissioned through ROTC at a random state school, an HBCU, or straight out of OCS. The military doesn’t give extra points for having gone to Annapolis.

You’re all in the same boat. The troops these officers lead—the enlisted force—are already way more diverse and look a lot more like America than the officer corps does. Unless someone is actually proposing we scrap ROTC and OCS completely and make the academies the only way to become an officer—which nobody is—then why single out the academies and strip away their ability to build a more representative class? ROTC and OCS will keep producing diverse officers because they draw from a much wider pool of colleges.


You’d just be making one small commissioning source less diverse while the majority stay the same.The military itself keeps saying a diverse officer corps is essential for unit cohesion, recruitment, retention, and national security. The academies are a tiny fraction of total officers, but they punch above their weight in producing senior leaders 20-30 years down the road.So yeah, I think the academies should keep using race-conscious admissions (within whatever narrow lane the Court left open for national security reasons) to look more like the country. Otherwise we’re just making the problem worse for no reason.