Woman becomes 2nd US Extreme Forces Operative for US Conventional Branches of Army, Air Force, Coast Guard, Navy, Space Force

I really do not know why wrote:

This message board seems obsessed with U.S. military special operators. Special operator is not usually the best career path. The vast majority of commissioned officer special operators never get past O-6. Very rarely does a commissioned officer special operator get to rank of O-7. O-7 is either a one star admiral or a one star general, depending on the branch of military.

Just curious. Seems like you need to look at percentages here. What percentage of SF 0-6 comprise the military? What percentage move past it? What percentage move past it from the "regular" service?

In my OCS class there were a few D1 runners and a National Champion so no the women did not out perform the men on runs. However in the classroom, at the range and on marches they performed better than most men.

Luv2Run wrote:

I really do not know why wrote:

This message board seems obsessed with U.S. military special operators. Special operator is not usually the best career path. The vast majority of commissioned officer special operators never get past O-6. Very rarely does a commissioned officer special operator get to rank of O-7. O-7 is either a one star admiral or a one star general, depending on the branch of military.

Just curious. Seems like you need to look at percentages here. What percentage of SF 0-6 comprise the military? What percentage move past it? What percentage move past it from the "regular" service?

I know special forces are a career killer. I cannot post chart with graph because number of personnel in special forces is classified info. Many or most commissioned officers do not make it past O-3 on active duty. That said, an infantry O-3 company commander in U.S.M.C. or U.S. Army is more likely to make it to O-6 or O-7 than an O-3 Navy Se.A.L. or O-3 Army Green Beret. Trust me, U.S. military does not want admirals & generals who have been eating snakes and rats. They do not necessarily fit in with other commissioned officers. Special forces is awful training to back slap members of U.S. Congress and weapon contractors. Special forces does not develop logistics know how. It's one thing developing a rescue mission or assassination mission with 12 to 40 (mostly) men for a 40 hour mission. An admiral/general needs logistics know how to move a million men & women with weapons, food and gear 1/2 way around the world.

g1

That's the tradeoff that the Founding fathers designed in 1776. The regular Army and Navy consisting of commoners who serve and return to commoner status, and Marines with often fatal animalistic initiation rituals from the Dark Ages of Old Europe. It still is that way today. Just read the news.

Tradeoffs between Commoners and Animals wrote:

That's the tradeoff that the Founding fathers designed in 1776. The regular Army and Navy consisting of commoners who serve and return to commoner status, and Marines with often fatal animalistic initiation rituals from the Dark Ages of Old Europe. It still is that way today. Just read the news.

On another thread you were corrected, but you continue with the same errors.

U.S. Army, established in 1775. U.S. Navy, established in 1775. U.S.M.C., established in 1775. U.S. Coast Guard, established in 1790. U.S. Air Force established, 1947.

I do not know what evidence are you rely on to state U.S.M.C. and animalistic rituals.

There is cooperation with all U.S. military branches. U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy pilots will tell you, U.S. Marines, by far are the bravest fighters in the entire U.S. military. Marines are willing to go straight toward an adversary in daylight while significantly outnumbered.