Fitness is great, and by all means am I not saying get rid of it, but isn't there more to being a soldier than just PT and weapons?

1SG, I love the response, as you said we have to ADJUST the standards of fitness. I am not a cyber defender myself but as you said those guys are just as important now more than ever. The Army is an ever evolving beast, changing year after year. We need to stop being so hard pressed by old standards (such as the height and weight standard) and change them accordingly. This is something I'm striving to do, and I know that when I make it up top I can have a more direct affect on those changes.

PO2 William Allen Crowder - no, Manning was an intel analyst, not a cyber warrior.

It's not even about cyber warfare, necessarily (though more on that in a second).

Logistics is headed back towards the DISCOM model, albeit leaner and more agile, with the need for advanced capabilities on even the parts of junior enlisted in terms of forecasting calculations. The PT stud is irrelevant even in those shops if he can't adequately use systems or his brain to calculate consumption rates and needs for LOGPAC deliveries. He still needs to look and present as a soldier, certainly, but his weapon system is going to need to be his brain, and in many instances with enlisted promotions, the capable can end up falling behind the PT stud in lists.

With regards to cyber, there's a strong budgetary argument to folding cyber defense (and cyber war) within the DoD, as well as some practical, as well as Constitutional consideration.

One, destabilizing attacks on infrastructure have traditionally been considered acts of war. Just because it can be accomplished digitally doesn't change that this ends up being a defense priority the same as physical attacks, simply because the digital attack can cause physical destruction or disruption.

Two, our offensive capability, because these attacks can be considered acts of war by foreign states, we need to consider that in the future, our checks and balances will demand that we engage some of these capabilities only in a declared state of war, as opposed to clandestine operations. Those capabilities need to be owned by the DoD, subsequently.

Third, not all electronic warfare takes place off the battlefield. Our digital technology can be countered with homebrewed, Raspberry Pi devices. The enemy is using iPad apps to range mortar and light artillery. We need the capability in theater to wage and defend against electronic warfare.

And honestly, the civilian market (my civilian career is programming) is so starved for talent that you can graduate college and command close to 6 figures. Patriotism isn't enough to make the military a competitive choice in order to attract the skill set we need. Just look at the instruction and development model for our Java-based BFT derivatives like JCR Log. Most the instructors are prior military, often admittedly daft, and somewhere, buried deep with a contractor, is an overpaid programmer, simply because no one knows better.

Honestly, I don't think the PT standards are going to make much of a difference in attracting and retaining IT talent. It's one of the few fields where you can reasonably expect to be able to pay student loans for even the most expensive private college program. But force-wide, and I say this having transitioned after 20 years an infantryman to logistics, we need to consider the possibility that trigger pullers should perhaps be the only ones with promotions buttressed by PT capabilities.

I think the other reason behind physical fitness is you heal quicker with less complications if you get wounded.

Nothing foul going on in my unit, just asking out of curiousness as someone who is looking to become a leader and looking to go to the dark side (yes I am putting in an OCS packet) I want to try to change the Army for the better in any way that is possible. I am noticing the Army is pushing a lot of people to be "Beasts" at PT. I firmly understand that fitness is important, but that is all units seem to make it about anymore.

Say a unit has a 270 PT average and someone doesn't meet that standard they are chastised, looked down on and forced to push themselves harder to meet that standard.

I know people who can do push ups and sit-ups all day until the cows come home, but can barely do anything when it comes to trying to carry a casualty in full kit, and I know people who have a 220 PT average but can carry casualty after casualty in full kit and more.

SPC Erich Guenther has a good point. Body fat and weak immune systems don't heal fast or well.
SSG Ray Petersen - APFT scores and fitness are not one in the same. Units that have that glooming "270 or 'you suck'" mindset are likely toxic and doing very little to help Soldiers achieve that standard during PRT to enhance morale.