how many stepped forward who educated their daughters in Europe thus making them eligible to become a royal?

"The average education level of my company was a Masters degree with most men having gone beyond that level.

The average education level of the officers was substantially less and they were a problem to manage at times. But we all coped as best we could. "

During the Vietnam war the US had the draft. In the beginning there were a lot of different deferments. If you were married or in college that kept you out of the draft and away from Vietnam. There were deferments for undergraduate school and graduate school and for critical skills in war industries.

In 1967 they needed a lot of men and the eliminated many of the student deferments including most of the graduate school (Masters level) deferments. All of a sudden the US military became filled with men with degrees and advanced degrees.

Of course. This situation was written about fairly extensively in the press at the time.

"The average education level of my company was a Masters degree with most men having gone beyond that level.

The average education level of the officers was substantially less and they were a problem to manage at times. But we all coped as best we could. "

yeah right. .

To claim that a Masters degree is the average for enlisted men in an army company beggars belief.

Are "masters degrees" given out with food coupons in America?

Somewhere in your assertion is an explanation why the American military has a reputation for being reckless "cowboys",

There is also a very sad indictment on the American education system, which is hard to believe as I have met (virtually) some intelligent and well educated Americans on this forum.

During the Vietnam war the US had the draft. In the beginning there were a lot of different deferments. If you were married or in college that kept you out of the draft and away from Vietnam. There were deferments for undergraduate school and graduate school and for critical skills in war industries.

In 1967 they needed a lot of men and the eliminated many of the student deferments including most of the graduate school (Masters level) deferments. All of a sudden the US military became filled with men with degrees and advanced degrees.

When I went through basic training they lined us all up and asked anyone with a degree to step forward. Half of the 100 men stepped forward. Then they asked for anyone with a masters to step forward and 30 guys stepped forward. Then Ph D's and 10 stepped forward. Those guys got KP (kitchen) duty for the first two weeks.

All of a sudden the labor pool of the US Army was inundated with a large supply of very well educated troops.

They were shipping people to Vietnam after 6 weeks of basic training. Graduate engineers, physicists, all sorts of health and legal professionals.

It created an odd situation. The enlisted ranks became very well educated and the officers and non commissioned officers less educated.

Each command had a company that managed the command structure they called them headquarters companies. For example there was USARV, that is the United States Army Republic of Vietnam and USARV was managed by HHC USARV, headquarters and headquarters company United States Army Republic of Vietnam.

That's the basics the rest is for reading only if interested in details.

Wars are not only waged by warriors but also by thinkers and managers. Much like any normal corporation. 1 combat 8 support was the ratio during Vietnam.

WWII in the US was managed by Eastern Universities, Harvard, Yale and so on. The cream of the crop.

Vietnam was an unpopular war right from the beginning. The students who would normally have made up the officer corps from the Eastern top tier universities didn't enlist in officer training programs.

The officer training academies like West Point and Annapolis only produce a few graduates and those people are intended to fill the upper ranks. The majority of officers come from other sources like college ROTC programs. For example I was offered a commission in the Navy because of my degree and training but I would have extended my active duty from 2 years (draft) to 6 years reserve officer program. I was also offered two field commissions (rank given in combat) but again I would have needed to extend my active duty commitment another 4 years.

The Eastern Universities failure to supply officers led the command structures of Vietnam to be filled by Mid Western and Western Universities like the University of Michigan and UCLA.

Most of the enlisted men with advanced degrees were performing duties that they were way overqualified for.

Most of the staff officers performed duties that they under-qualified for. Since water seeks it's own level the duties were quickly adjusted.

The pecking order was HHC USARV, got the first pick of troops arriving in Vietnam. They pulled draftees who had graduated from a particular university and so on down the line. The photo is my first Christmas in Vietnam/Thailand. Look at the faces. 2 Ph D's three Masters degrees. These are not Rambo types these are guys right out of college. We went to work in an office every day. We all had a Vietnamese or Thai secretary. We managed the war. That's what managers do.

The Pentagon said take hill number 24. We scheduled the aircraft the bomb the hill, the fuel to power the helicopters, the bombs to bomb and the bullets to kill. The grunts had to be transported to the hill and have food and guns and medical facilities in case they got hurt. They had to have a place to stay when they weren't killing people and recreation so they wouldn't get bored or depressed. It's logistics. It takes a lot of time and resources.

Most of the people I knew in the Army were well educated, middle or upper middle class young men who just wanted to do their time and go home. Gay or straight? No body cared. There were lots of women around no one was horny. There was free beer and whiskey and cigarettes. I feel for the guys in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. That must be an awful place to have a war.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

You do the maths, keeping in mind what "average" indicates (the mean). 30 out of 100?

Nevertheless, regardless of your initial gross exageration,......oh, forget it. You're not worth arguing.

Americans volunteer for the military for many reasons. Indeed, a large portion are poor and uneducated, and see that path as their best hope for their future. But it's not that simple. There are military families with a long family history of serving, there are cultural factors, such as being from the South and small towns, that contribute to making this choice. One issue I have with the current system is that indeed the children of the elite mostly don't serve and yet it is the elite that makes the decisions to enter wars. If Bush's daughters had to serve and risk their lives, perhaps W wouldn't have lied to the world to start that mistake in Iraq, without a doubt the biggest foreign policy error in American history.

I've just now found this thread but that's an excellent post JT. I don't know if there is such a thing as a "righteous war", but if there is it stands to reason that everyone should stand to sacrifice for such a cause.

Now that gays are allowed to join the military, the myth of volunteers being poor and stupid has gone up in smoke.

Gays can't be poor or stupid? I don't get the connection, please explain.

Well I joined the Military in 1978. I have worn a uniform and carried guns ever since. I can say with many years of authority, the sexual orientation of the man or woman who stands next to you when the shit hits the fan matters not one jot or tittle and has never crossed the mind of anyone under fire..................True fact.

That is extremely easy to believe.

. The average education level of my company was a Masters degree with most men having gone beyond that level.

I enjoy your posts very much Mark, and i enjoyed "ChiangMai Kelly" before, but I have to say given that you were a draftee in 1968 that statement is difficult to believe.

There is also a very sad indictment on the American education system

According to the Guardian, the USA has 12 of the top 16 Universities in the world - including number ONE - and the other 4 are in the UK.

New Zealand has one University in the top 100 at number 65.

The American education system seems to be doing pretty well compared to everyone else on the planet.

http://www.guardian....versities-world

I depends on the criteria of the moment. When i first started tracking this stuff America had 91 of the top 100 universities in the world. The university i went to was number 8. Most of the others that rounded out the top 100 were British and one Australian university. Four or five years later i see America is down to 64ish out of the top 100 universities and Australia has seven universities in the top 100. I guesss my point is, it's all bullshit. No way does America have 91 of the top universities and no way does Australia have seven.

"The average education level of my company was a Masters degree with most men having gone beyond that level.

The average education level of the officers was substantially less and they were a problem to manage at times. But we all coped as best we could. "

yeah right. .

To claim that a Masters degree is the average for enlisted men in an army company beggars belief.

Are "masters degrees" given out with food coupons in America?

Somewhere in your assertion is an explanation why the American military has a reputation for being reckless "cowboys",

There is also a very sad indictment on the American education system, which is hard to believe as I have met (virtually) some intelligent and well educated Americans on this forum.

During the Vietnam war the US had the draft. In the beginning there were a lot of different deferments. If you were married or in college that kept you out of the draft and away from Vietnam. There were deferments for undergraduate school and graduate school and for critical skills in war industries.

In 1967 they needed a lot of men and the eliminated many of the student deferments including most of the graduate school (Masters level) deferments. All of a sudden the US military became filled with men with degrees and advanced degrees.

When I went through basic training they lined us all up and asked anyone with a degree to step forward. Half of the 100 men stepped forward. Then they asked for anyone with a masters to step forward and 30 guys stepped forward. Then Ph D's and 10 stepped forward. Those guys got KP (kitchen) duty for the first two weeks.

All of a sudden the labor pool of the US Army was inundated with a large supply of very well educated troops.

They were shipping people to Vietnam after 6 weeks of basic training. Graduate engineers, physicists, all sorts of health and legal professionals.

It created an odd situation. The enlisted ranks became very well educated and the officers and non commissioned officers less educated.

Each command had a company that managed the command structure they called them headquarters companies. For example there was USARV, that is the United States Army Republic of Vietnam and USARV was managed by HHC USARV, headquarters and headquarters company United States Army Republic of Vietnam.

That's the basics the rest is for reading only if interested in details.

Wars are not only waged by warriors but also by thinkers and managers. Much like any normal corporation. 1 combat 8 support was the ratio during Vietnam.

WWII in the US was managed by Eastern Universities, Harvard, Yale and so on. The cream of the crop.

Vietnam was an unpopular war right from the beginning. The students who would normally have made up the officer corps from the Eastern top tier universities didn't enlist in officer training programs.

The officer training academies like West Point and Annapolis only produce a few graduates and those people are intended to fill the upper ranks. The majority of officers come from other sources like college ROTC programs. For example I was offered a commission in the Navy because of my degree and training but I would have extended my active duty from 2 years (draft) to 6 years reserve officer program. I was also offered two field commissions (rank given in combat) but again I would have needed to extend my active duty commitment another 4 years.

The Eastern Universities failure to supply officers led the command structures of Vietnam to be filled by Mid Western and Western Universities like the University of Michigan and UCLA.

Most of the enlisted men with advanced degrees were performing duties that they were way overqualified for.

Most of the staff officers performed duties that they under-qualified for. Since water seeks it's own level the duties were quickly adjusted.

The pecking order was HHC USARV, got the first pick of troops arriving in Vietnam. They pulled draftees who had graduated from a particular university and so on down the line. The photo is my first Christmas in Vietnam/Thailand. Look at the faces. 2 Ph D's three Masters degrees. These are not Rambo types these are guys right out of college. We went to work in an office every day. We all had a Vietnamese or Thai secretary. We managed the war. That's what managers do.

The Pentagon said take hill number 24. We scheduled the aircraft the bomb the hill, the fuel to power the helicopters, the bombs to bomb and the bullets to kill. The grunts had to be transported to the hill and have food and guns and medical facilities in case they got hurt. They had to have a place to stay when they weren't killing people and recreation so they wouldn't get bored or depressed. It's logistics. It takes a lot of time and resources.

Most of the people I knew in the Army were well educated, middle or upper middle class young men who just wanted to do their time and go home. Gay or straight? No body cared. There were lots of women around no one was horny. There was free beer and whiskey and cigarettes. I feel for the guys in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. That must be an awful place to have a war.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

You do the maths, keeping in mind what "average" indicates (the mean). 30 out of 100?

Nevertheless, regardless of your initial gross exageration,......oh, forget it. You're not worth arguing.

Maybe I am not explaining myself very well. The Stateside army sent a bunch of GI's to Vietnam. Some had gone to advanced infantry training school, some to radio school and so on. However most had only gone to 6 weeks of basic training. They showed up in Vietnam without assignment. The headquarters companies got first pick of that group. HQ USARV being in command of Vietnam got first pick of the HQ companies. They looked at the records of each soldier with at least a BA or BS degree and picked what they needed. In my case they found three other soldiers who had the same qualifications. We all went into the General's office for an interview. He asked me a few questions and we went from the General's office to the Sergeants office. He gave us a typing test. Since I made spare money in college typing term papers I was a quick typist (125 wpm). I was twice as fast as the other two guys interviewing for the job. Those guys went out to units in the rice paddies. The typing test was a bit silly because my secretary did 90% of my typing but that's the army.

The process was kind of like a sports draft. The big teams, get the best* players and the second and third tier teams get the rest. The units commanding the theater of operations got the best educated, most qualified administrative soldiers who were based in Long Binh Vietnam America's largest base during the war had a population of 60,000 plus troops or Saigon. *best meaning best administrators.

The 60,000 troops stationed in Long Binh for the most part didn't fight the war with guns they managed the war with brains. To put it in perspective, in 1970 there were 350,000 troops in Vietnam and 50,000 in Thailand. The total number of American soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan in 2009 was about 57,000.

I guesss my point is, it's all bullshit.

If you say so, but there is nothing in your post to support your opinion.

I guesss my point is, it's all bullshit.

If you say so, but there is nothing in your post to support your opinion.

OK UG, you can give me one of these if you want but everything I said is supported by some internet link or other:

Here's one showing us Americans sliding down the scale. That ought to please most of our readers:

http://www.guardian....tion?intcmp=239

This link says Australia has 5 of the top 100 universities. That can't be right either.

Anything can be supported by some Internet link or another, but your link still is dominated by American Universities - including the top 5 - even though it is British newspaper.

I understand that this is your opinion, but just saying it does not prove much of anything.

Harvard is back at number one - and there is not a British university in the top five.

It should be easy to find the top 40 schools ranked by starting salaries of graduates. I would think out of the top 40, 30 would be in the US.

It should be easy to find the top 40 schools ranked by starting salaries of graduates. I would think out of the top 40, 30 would be in the US.

i would think maybe 38 or 39.

. The average education level of my company was a Masters degree with most men having gone beyond that level.

I enjoy your posts very much Mark, and i enjoyed "ChiangMai Kelly" before, but I have to say given that you were a draftee in 1968 that statement is difficult to believe.

having served 15 months in a 101st Airborne combat unit i find the "master's degree" statement ridiculous². a number of comrades in my company who had a high school "degree" thought "Nam" was in the vicinity of Tokyo and not too far away from Egypt. needless to say that there were draftees at that time with a higher academic level than my own. Uncle Sam did not discriminate when sending out draft letters and not everybody was able to move to Canada/Sweden or enjoy the exclusions of Bill Clinton or George Bush, pequeño.

I never said the average education of the US soldier during the Vietnam war was an MA. I said MY COMPANY. I served in a headquarters command company.

Now that gays are allowed to join the military, the myth of volunteers being poor and stupid has gone up in smoke.

Gays can't be poor or stupid? I don't get the connection, please explain.

The US Military is a volunteer force. The Left (at least in America) generally excuses this by saying that the only people who volunteer for the military during a time of war do so out of socio-economic reasons - they are too poor and uneducated to get a real job. Now that Gays can openly serve, the Left trumpets the bravery and patriotism of Gays who want to volunteer to defend their country. If anyone can post a link to an article where a left-leaning writer says that the only openly gay people who would join are poor and/or uneducated I would appreciate it.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

All this crowing from Americans about how great the American education system is reminds me of (and without mentioning the clip in Bedlam about "Stupid Americans"") of an American sailor who stayed with my family for a few days in Fiji.

He was from Montana, and accordong to him the state of Montana was bigger than the country of Australia. He was so adamant, that my mum finally got out an atlas......... when shown that Oz was actually almost as big as the entire contiguous US, he said the atlas was not credible because it was printed in Australia. No way could my parents convince him.

As a child, even then without any political leanings, it occurred to me that (this) American was very one eyed when it came to America, was not very learned, and expected a country to publish dishonest biased-to-the-nation information in school text books.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

I mentioned the SAT scores because it is the only general measure of inter generational education that I know of. The others like LASAT scores dealing with law school admissions or GRE dealing with graduate school admissions are more specific to area of study. From what I can gather although there has been some changes in the test, there has not been a significant gain or drop in education/intelligence of students entering college in the past 40 years.

I compared my SAT scores to my daughters SAT scores and her classmates SAT scores to get an idea of her intelligence/education relative to mine and her prep school relative to my prep school. My youngest daughter was smarter than I as were her classmates. My children all took IQ tests at a very young age as it was a requirement to enter the schools I wanted them to attend.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

All this crowing from Americans about how great the American education system is reminds me of (and without mentioning the clip in Bedlam about "Stupid Americans"") of an American sailor who stayed with my family for a few days in Fiji.

He was from Montana, and accordong to him the state of Montana was bigger than the country of Australia. He was so adamant, that my mum finally got out an atlas......... when shown that Oz was actually almost as big as the entire contiguous US, he said the atlas was not credible because it was printed in Australia. No way could my parents convince him.

As a child, even then without any political leanings, it occurred to me that (this) American was very one eyed when it came to America, was not very learned, and expected a country to publish dishonest biased-to-the-nation information in school text books.

So you have identified one ignorant American. Good for you. What is your point relative to the majority of college educated Americans?

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

I mentioned the SAT scores because it is the only general measure of inter generational education that I know of. The others like LASAT scores dealing with law school admissions or GRE dealing with graduate school admissions are more specific to area of study. From what I can gather although there has been some changes in the test, there has not been a significant gain or drop in education/intelligence of students entering college in the past 40 years.

I compared my SAT scores to my daughters SAT scores and her classmates SAT scores to get an idea of her intelligence/education relative to mine and her prep school relative to my prep school. My youngest daughter was smarter than I as were her classmates. My children all took IQ tests at a very young age as it was a requirement to enter the schools I wanted them to attend.

You compared apples to pears. The test you did was different, except in name, to the test your daughter did.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

All this crowing from Americans about how great the American education system is reminds me of (and without mentioning the clip in Bedlam about "Stupid Americans"") of an American sailor who stayed with my family for a few days in Fiji.

He was from Montana, and accordong to him the state of Montana was bigger than the country of Australia. He was so adamant, that my mum finally got out an atlas......... when shown that Oz was actually almost as big as the entire contiguous US, he said the atlas was not credible because it was printed in Australia. No way could my parents convince him.

As a child, even then without any political leanings, it occurred to me that (this) American was very one eyed when it came to America, was not very learned, and expected a country to publish dishonest biased-to-the-nation information in school text books.

So you have identified one ignorant American. Good for you. What is your point relative to the majority of college educated Americans?

It's a matter of perception. I have met many Americans, some dumber than the Montanan, some smarter....but most had the US-centric blinders that crippled their world view. On this forum, I see much blind patriotism, a modicum of intelligence, but little learnedness.

A "modicum" of intelligence on this forum certainly applies to more than one nationality.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

All this crowing from Americans about how great the American education system is reminds me of (and without mentioning the clip in Bedlam about "Stupid Americans"") of an American sailor who stayed with my family for a few days in Fiji.

He was from Montana, and accordong to him the state of Montana was bigger than the country of Australia. He was so adamant, that my mum finally got out an atlas......... when shown that Oz was actually almost as big as the entire contiguous US, he said the atlas was not credible because it was printed in Australia. No way could my parents convince him.

As a child, even then without any political leanings, it occurred to me that (this) American was very one eyed when it came to America, was not very learned, and expected a country to publish dishonest biased-to-the-nation information in school text books.

So you have identified one ignorant American. Good for you. What is your point relative to the majority of college educated Americans?

I have identified more than one....I have related an anecdote of one.

You missed my point...and I admit I didn't make it clear enough for people with blinders.......Americans are, as a rule of thumb, very patriotic, to the point of being blind to the faults of their own country.

The irony of me saying that is that the typical American will not accept it.

Because it is not true - as some of the posters in Outside the Box prove conclusively.

Some Americans have posted nothing but hateful complaints about their country for years on these very pages.

A "modicum" of intelligence on this forum certainly applies to more than one nationality.

Your "innocent whisteler" smiley indicates that you took the word "modicum" out of context, Not suprising.

Intelligence was the operative word in the sentence.

To make it clear for you.......I was conceding that some Americans certainly have some intelligence.

"Some" (Americans) is the operative word here though.

Darn nice of you.

American vs English or Australian universities? I think there is enough comparative information available. American university standards then and now? Check the SAT scores.

The SAT is taken before being admitted to university.

I mentioned the SAT scores because it is the only general measure of inter generational education that I know of. The others like LASAT scores dealing with law school admissions or GRE dealing with graduate school admissions are more specific to area of study. From what I can gather although there has been some changes in the test, there has not been a significant gain or drop in education/intelligence of students entering college in the past 40 years.

I compared my SAT scores to my daughters SAT scores and her classmates SAT scores to get an idea of her intelligence/education relative to mine and her prep school relative to my prep school. My youngest daughter was smarter than I as were her classmates. My children all took IQ tests at a very young age as it was a requirement to enter the schools I wanted them to attend.

You compared apples to pears. The test you did was different, except in name, to the test your daughter did.

Certain high IQ societies, like Mensa, the Prometheus Society and the Triple Nine Society, use scores from certain years as one of their admission tests. For instance, the Triple Nine Society accepts scores of 1450 on tests taken before April 1995, and scores of at least 1520 on tests taken between April 1995 and February 2005.

This seems to suggest that someone knows the difficulty level of the tests and they are getting eaiser.

Perhaps, since you seem to know could you tell us how to evaluate the test scores by year?

Certain high IQ societies, like Mensa, the Prometheus Society and the Triple Nine Society, use scores from certain years as one of their admission tests. For instance, the Triple Nine Society accepts scores of 1450 on tests taken before April 1995, and scores of at least 1520 on tests taken between April 1995 and February 2005.

This seems to suggest that someone knows the difficulty level of the tests and they are getting eaiser.

Perhaps, since you seem to know could you tell us how to evaluate the test scores by year?

No.

I was simply saying that the test you did was different, therefore the results show something different. Apples/Pears

It seems from your post that The Triple Nine Society have recognised this too....unfortunately, you didn't.