"Military eyes 16-year-olds as ranks and candidates dwindle" Topic

"The best way to fix the U.S. armed forces' recruiting challenges may involve dipping further into the nation's high schools.

As the Army, Navy and other services contend with a thriving economy and a directive to expand their ranks, there is a growing debate over whether the military should consider lowering the minimum enlistment age from 17 to 16. More than a dozen countries, including the United Kingdom, already have adopted the policy.

Critics say the idea is deeply flawed and presents a host of societal problems, but supporters argue that the Pentagon needs to think outside the box if it wants to continually overcome one of the toughest recruiting environments in decades…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Correcting physical education classes in US schools might be a better solution. Instead of teaching kids how to square dance and play volley ball (among other things), they might be better served by being taught the proper way to exercise. That's my two cents, and worth every penny you paid for it.

Horrified quick responses by normal civilians, not counting most gamers who have some insight into history, this would seem horrifying. The idea that 16 and 17 year olds are unfit or underdeveloped is also wrong.
Many examples of this age group being active soldiers and not only musicians can be found. This includes 15 year old Generals in the CSA.
Many of this age group enlisted in WW2.

Plausible options include returning to old 1950 and 1960 enlistment practices have to be considered. During those decades and earlier it was very common for a minor criminal to be given the option of going into the military rather than going to jail. Now days would not the military option also be better than the foster care or homeless systems?

Another practice would be to enlist this age group and females into none combat duties in the rear area or the States house me bases. Youth can conduct duty functions and allow more senior soldiers to go to an active front. This has been successfully used with very senior soldiers as part of the stop gap policy of the 2000's.

This is just irresponsible conjecture. Note that they say that no one in the Department of Defense is suggesting this. Despite their click-bait-ish headline. That used to be a fairly respectable newspaper, but I'm most likely showing my age.