Yes I am going to college now in Wyoming and this will be my second year and was wanting to get into the airforce with a DUI and was seeing how I could do that. I have a 3.4gpa. I talked to the commander in Wyoming ROTC but says I cant do it in the Airforce. How could I do this if I could even do it. thanks

As I was not in the Air Farce, I served as a sr. Nco in the army and I don't think you can and you will find it equally hard to get in any ROTC program, sorry you did not want to hear that but that is life. Maybe you can go get it expunged from your records that may be the only way.

One should always start by talking to the right people first....namely 'recruiters'.

Don't do ROTC, just go through school, keep your grades up, and stay out of trouble and then apply for OCS, OTS or whatever the air force calls it a year before you graduate. They will ask about your DUI when you apply, but if you stay out of trouble during the rest of your days in college, it will show that you have become more responsible. I know of one guy in the navy that had gotten a DUI when he was in college, he straigtened up the last 2 years of school and was accepted to navy OCS.

yes you can. i just asked my uncle who is a LT Colonel. he said he did....

Getting an AF commission is near impossible now. Unless you can walk on water, raise the dead and your dad is a congressman, good luck.

I bet you could enlist in the Air Force with a DUI, might be really tough to be an officer. What do others think about that? If he walked into a recruiters office with his degree, a couple letters of recommendation from people perhaps people you know that were in he miltary, a good ASVAB score etc. he should have no problem getting a wavier for enlistment... I'm just guessing there... others would have to put there two cents in on that one

I am in the airforce, and I was assisting a recruiter for a while, he could join as enlisted only if he did not serve time for it. Other then that, his records can be cleared in 10 years since the incident, but then there is that cut off age.

being enlisted and being an officer are 2 very different things. Whatever you do dont compromise your original goal, the military is a cast system and your position in that cast will greatly affect your quality of life while you are in.

Ah, the voice of experience speaks.

Correct me if im wrong, I think I have refined my arrguments pretty well at this point.

You might have but we still love giving you crap rppearso.

Okay, I am a detailed recruiter for the Army. And believe me, I KNOW how the other services work. The truth be told, the Air Force ain't hiring. They cut 40,000 personnel, and aren't looking very hard for more people. Most Air Force recruiters are barely showing up in their offices, they have a low mission, and are asking for call-in applicants only. They will pre-screen them and make a determination. It might work, but thats the best answer I can give you. Best bet, speak with an AF recruiter, and ask. Be forthright and tell them, the worst they can say is no. They can be picky about it. Its the Air Force, they have always taken highly qualified personnel in, and have always been very rigid about it. That won't change. I have a lot of affection for the Air Force because I am an Air Force brat. Although you can get it expunged, its not going to matter, it'll still show up when your background is run. Seal it, expunge it, it can be dropped or dismissed, we still see it, even if it is a juvenile charge. Best of luck.

Hmm, the air force is meeting its goals and the army isent doing quite as well. Why cant the army learn from the air force and maybe they would have a little easier time recruiting. Maybe thats why ft leonard wood is is making the changes its making.

Another naysayer to the Army retention and accession mission. Fantastic! We are trying to grow by 50,000 personnel with PLUS2 Manning systems. The Air Force is cutting 40,000. Downsizing isn't a question of retention now is it? Its easy to meet a goal when your service has less than 250,000 people onboard. Their annual mission is similar to our quarterly mission. So, maybe you should learn from those of us that know whats going on. Try maintaining a force of 1.5 million people and see how well you do. Don't be dumb and blame the war either. Whole units are reenlisting together in Iraq, retention is up, our recruiting mission goes down. By logic, if the Navy and Air Force are downsizing because they are overstrength, the recruiting mission will be rock bottom bare minimum, because they aren't growing. We are the largest branch, with more numbers, you need more in the training pipeline as people move up and out of baseline positions. The IET locations are all changing the training programs to reflect the modern battlefield, and prepare soldiers for the next generation of military programs, materiel, and systems.

Ok, I will take your word for it. No matter what kind of research you do you seem to get people on both sides of the fence so it is difficult to determine what is acurate. I understand people are reenlisting but alot are getting out as well or not signing up to begin with. Why would the navy and airforce be down sizing and the army upsizing? Why would the air force only need 250,000 and the army need so much more. I hate to say it and you will no doubt argue me on this but it seems like the army is looking for "cannon fauder" or as they like to call it "boots on the ground" otherwise you would be MOS first and infantry in an absolute worse case senario, the fact that they pull MOS speciltys from what they are doing, or not doing (which is irrelavant) to do things like pull security or patrols is putting someone that did not sign up to be cannon fauder into a cannon fauder position. This kind of actions creates a distrust,there is also the issue of stop loss policys. Stop loss is the militarys way of saying you have to hold up your end of a contract but we dont which breeds more distrust. So while I agree people are reenlisting, I wonder which side of the fence has the more credible numbers.

The Army has always had to Patrol and Pull Security. Its called being a soldier. There are certain things all soldiers MUST know. How to defend themselves, protect themselves and the equipment they are responsible for, First Aid and treating casualties. The list goes on. Patrol knowledge and how to react to an ambush is a lesson learned from Miss Lynch's fiasco. Its something everyone was supposed to know, and be able to do, but people that believe they didn't sign up for it are idiots. We are the Army, what in the world do you think we do??

The Navy and Air Force are downsizing, for 2 major reasons. Budget, and Technology. Nuclear powered vessels, automation, more reliable equipment, doesn't take 5,000 people to maintain, its wasted money says the American public, so Congress has to review budgets. No need for 'em, they gotta go. (Even though, ships need paint, runways need sweeping, etc.)

The Army is, and always has been the largest branch. It only maintains 10 Combat Divisions. Congress and DoD sees a need for more to support the worldwide missions. The Navy only has 323,000 ballpark, and their job is the water. The Corps can't do it because they don't have the equipment or personnel because they are part of the Navy, and not even one-fourth of the size of the Army; (originally modeled to guard ships and protect them from boarding). The Air Force's job is the air, so it would seem land based operations belong to the Army. The Army has the largest budget, and we own 82% of all the service schools, its our show. It always has been our show, despite what everyone else thinks. "Cannon Fodder" is a joke. There sure as hell aren't any satellite signal techs doing combat patrols UNLESS they ASKED to do it. Its not what they are trained to do, we don't let 'em do it. Cannon Fodder? Doubtful. Besides, we are authorized a 10% loss of force. We aren't even close to worrying about how many we losing. It sucks having to bury a buddy, I know, I did it, but its war, people die. I have essential tasks that need to be completed so countless hundreds don't die, one or two is acceptable. Its the big picture, one is minor compared to one thousand. We've lost 2,200 personnel in almost three years of fighting?!? So what! Iwo Jima burned through 30,000 in a week! We can sustain these losses indefinitely, so the war ain't taking any toll that is measurable by combat standards. Its the price of warfighting. So be it. Why would the Air Force need less people?? How many aircraft totally subdued the Iraqi Air Force in how long? It took 2 months for total air superiority to be accomplished! When you are 100% effective, its needless to keep extra people onboard to cut the grass.

Stop Loss/Stop Move is in accordance with Unit Lifecycle management. You deploy as a TEAM, you come home as a TEAM. Besides, read the contract, you signed up for 8 (EIGHT) years. ALL contracts, ALL branches, 8 YEARS. Its your MSO, Military Service Obligation. Meaning you are OBLIGATED to complete eight years of service, in whatever capacity, be it Active, Reserve, or IRR. So it damn well is what THEY sign up for. Its the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard. Not free job training and college money. We fight and win wars. Been doing it for 200+ years, and it ain't changing anytime soon.

In these wars you speak of in the past they had a draft to maintain numbers. Good luck keeping numbers up without a draft if this war drags on forever. If people keep signing up and staying in the full 8 years after they learn what the army is about more power to you, of course this boils back down to scare tactics, the whole you signed a contract now your in buddy routine, the fact that these scare tactics have to be used makes me wonder how many would still be there if they knew they could get out (basicly if the military were truly volunteer, in other words you just stay as long as you are volunteering, how many would you really have). I have read stories about people being stop lossed after there 8 years, is there a valid excuss for this? No loss is acceptable for a war the public does not support, the reason for originally starting this war is not even valid anymore "WMD", once the "iraqi people" reason runs out I am curious to see what excuse the government will come up with to keep being over there. Your military service obligation is what you want it to be, as soon as the military breaks your contract as far as im concerned you can walk away when you want with out guilt, the military will get pissy but I wouldent feel bad. And the minute a satalite tech is pulling security thats a breach of contract becasue it diverges from you MOS. Your "contract" is only as good as thoes serving under it, when enough people get fed up with the BS it doesent matter what the contract says. If for some reason you signed a contract to shoot yourself would you still uphold that contract, the contract has to be benifitial to both parties during the entire life of that contract otherwise its a scam.

don't you ever speak about anything else? You sing the same tune over an over......give it a rest.

Sure it just depends on the topics that come up. The reason it sounds like I am singing the same tune is because no one will offer a very strong counterpoint to some of my arguments.

I just found another interesting piece of information, according to EEO (equal employment opprotunity) you can not deny someone on a back ground check for employment purposes a job on the basis of an OTH discharge or a bad SPN code, it has to be an actual dishonorable discharge where you were convicted of an actual crime. Keep in mind the back groud check is done after you have been hired and will determine if you stay on, and if you fail the back ground check they are required to tell you why by law.

http://www.wildmanharrold.com/labor_library/Equal_Oppor..._Employment_Laws.htm