Posted on Mar 7, 2018
4
4
0
"although Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has said he thinks it can be saved" .....hmmm
The US Army Promised Immigrants A Fast Track For Citizenship. That Fast Track Is Gone.
Posted from buzzfeed.comPosted in these groups: 
Immigration
Immigration
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
The program was rife with abuse, that is why Mattis and the Pentagon wanted it discontinued.
Another perspective on the story with a few more facts and quoted from policy makers and a little less emotion than buzzfeed.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/02/report-potential-security-risks-program-recruited-10000-foreign-born-members-u-s-armed-forces-2009/
Another perspective on the story with a few more facts and quoted from policy makers and a little less emotion than buzzfeed.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/02/report-potential-security-risks-program-recruited-10000-foreign-born-members-u-s-armed-forces-2009/
Report: 'Potential Security Risks' in Program That Recruited 10,000 Foreign-Born Members of U.S....
A Department of Defense program that has recruited 10,000 foreign-born members of the U.S. Armed Forces since 2009 may have "potential security risks."
(5)
(0)
SCPO Jason McLaughlin
Cpl Jeff N. - The numbers that I would like to see:
1. Security violations reported amongst the 10K+ already in the program
2. Attrition rates
3. False enlistments
4. Discipline issues
With 10K plus in the program, you have a large enough sample size to see if there is a disproportionate occurrence of the listed issues in comparison with the military as a whole. Disclosing the above would go a long way to showing that the policy change was not politically driven.
1. Security violations reported amongst the 10K+ already in the program
2. Attrition rates
3. False enlistments
4. Discipline issues
With 10K plus in the program, you have a large enough sample size to see if there is a disproportionate occurrence of the listed issues in comparison with the military as a whole. Disclosing the above would go a long way to showing that the policy change was not politically driven.
(1)
(0)
Susan Foster
Cpl Jeff N. - I guess that's my point. I don't know what the risk factors are, and are they higher than a sample of 10k from native-born enlistees. There seems to be some concern, yet no real facts are mentioned as to what exactly they are concerned about and why.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
SCPO Jason McLaughlin - I am not sure they will release too much detailed information due to privacy concerns. The bottom line is that this is an optional program, not required. If they have evidence that it creates security risks that are not acceptable then there is no requirement to continue it.
Susan Foster Native born enlistees are called citizens. These folks are not. It is not a requirement they are even given this opportunity. You are comparing apples and oranges.
I suspect that once better vetting procedures and approached are put in place it will be reinstated. There is nothing wrong with the program as long as the risks can be addressed and good background checks can be done etc.
Susan Foster Native born enlistees are called citizens. These folks are not. It is not a requirement they are even given this opportunity. You are comparing apples and oranges.
I suspect that once better vetting procedures and approached are put in place it will be reinstated. There is nothing wrong with the program as long as the risks can be addressed and good background checks can be done etc.
(1)
(0)
Susan Foster
Cpl Jeff N. - I totally agree. But whether someone is native born or not is not, IMHO, a requirement to be a good soldier. Especially the ones where they have never lived anywhere else. My only point is that nothing in the article brings out what the problems were with the program and why people viewing it got concerned.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
Personally, I would like to see someone have to complete an enlistment, whether its 2, 3, or 4 years. Or maybe once they reach 2 years, they can complete the process. Of course, all the required checks and vetting should also be completed. I don't agree with getting it right after basic training. Some of these recruits are immigration violators, and granting citizenship right after basic should not be a reward. 2 or 3 years is still very expedited considering 5 years is typical, and that's after becoming a Legal Resident.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google