I know I‘m going to catch **** for this, but here goes: the military is a young man‘s game.
I‘m 35 and in better shape than a lot of the guys in their teens and early 20‘s (or older) that work for me. I have to WORK hard to get and stay in shape now. When I was a young ‘un I could drink all night and then go for a LSD run. Now if I have a bit of a bender, I‘m recovering for 2 days, and forget about running (creaky bones).
I have heard/seen many people use their age as an excuse to be out of shape. When I joined there was "over 35" PT for all the crusty types, and I aspired to be able to do that. Alas, that has gone the way of the 5/4 ton...... I have to set goals for myself to force myself to stay in shape. I‘m running in the Cabot Trail Relay next weekend (17.5 km leg into Ingonish). I am planning on doing a half-marathon as soon as I can, and a marathon before I hit 40.
All that said, age is a frame of mind, and the people who "act" old (25 year olds with a big gut and can‘t climb a flight of stairs without huffing and puffing, and have the big-*** XBox thumb muscles, etc) are a poor excuse for soldiers. I agree that most people should be able to join (or apply at the least), but they better be able to perform. I have a 30 year old Trooper (private) in my troop who has more on the ball than some of the 18 year olds who have joined lately, and he has 10 times the work ethic and drive. This is of course due to maturity, and realizing that getting drunk and/or laid by Mary Jane Rottencrotch isn‘t the end-all for a Saturday night (man, I must be getting old if I feel that way too.....). Some of the older people joining have actually experienced life, and some of the chickensh!t stuff we do in the military isn‘t for them, and they think they are above doing it. But if you‘re a 35 year old Private and a 22 year old MCpl tells you to shovel sh!t, you better be hopping to it, and not moaning about it.
I suspect that if average 40 year old civilians can join, and pass all the training, that might be saying something about the state of our training (*****cough***too easy****cough*****). Not so much the training, I suppose, but the standards (or lack thereof). The military isn‘t a social employment agency, where it‘s "come one, come all and don‘t worry about meeting the standard: we‘ll lower ours to meet yours!!!!". The military is about the defence of our nation, and the nation‘s interests (whatever THEY want that to mean....). Soldiering should be difficult (and physically difficult). Walter Mitty types need not apply.
One of the things that distresses me of late with our military is the policy of offering extensions (CE - 3 or 5 year, IPS- indefinite period of service - up to the age of 55) to Cpl‘s and higher, whereas it used to go to only to WO‘s (in the Armour trade, anyway) and higher. I know some older guys that can soldier better than the young guys, but the thought of a 54 year old Corporal trying to keep up on a section attack makes me shudder. I know it can be done, but not by the people that I have seen getting the extensions. Yes, they have experience that 20 year olds don‘t have, but what good is that experience if it can‘t be employed where it‘s important: in the field, or more pointedly, overseas during operations. The British Army has (had??) a policy whereby you can only serve 22 years, unless you are a RSM. I don‘t know all the in‘s and out‘s of this policy, but a Brit Sgt I worked with in Bosnia in 2001 told me of it. I agree with it in principal though: war is a young man‘s game. I suppose the Brits should know this better than us, what with fighting wars for the last 1000 years or so.
I know that I went off on a tangent (what else is new). I hope the best for the older people that are joining, and I hope your eyes are open to the grim realities of the business (when you‘re 18 and you join, you don‘t know any better, so what is bullsh!t to a 35 year old might actually seem cool at that age). Be all that you can be.... If you have no life, there‘s nothing like it!!!!
Off for a nap now,
Al