hi guys and girls i'm 26,male english,fit and healthy but i do have considerable amount of tattoos, most visible being a tribal piece on the side of my face. I REALLY want to join the military can you please advise me on which military ANYWHERE in the world will take me. I am extremely interested in the french foreign legion but i keep hearing mixed reviews on wether they'll take me or not.i thank you in advance for your help and i.ll get a photo up asap as i'm new to this website thankyou
which military ANYWHERE in the world will take me after my mistakes :-/
- Thread starter wannajoin
- Start date
SURB
Member
Well i'm not an expert at this,but IMO it doesn't matter much if the tattoos are not on the exposed parts like face & hands.As far as you are fully fit (both physically and mentally) and the board of doctors or examination team clears i think there should be no objection anywhere.
But after seeing your pic, i'll suggest you better get some treatment and remove the tattoos on the face ,i think that will do it.Laser treatments of tattoo removal are available almost everywhere.
Have you ever previously applied in army?
If not my opinion is remove the tattoos from exposed parts the hands ,face and head and apply then.
But if you don't want this way, nothing bad in trying and getting a first hand experience.
After all snipers and elite do need some skin camouflage sometime.I hope they'll consider you.
Best wishes.
But after seeing your pic, i'll suggest you better get some treatment and remove the tattoos on the face ,i think that will do it.Laser treatments of tattoo removal are available almost everywhere.
Have you ever previously applied in army?
If not my opinion is remove the tattoos from exposed parts the hands ,face and head and apply then.
But if you don't want this way, nothing bad in trying and getting a first hand experience.
After all snipers and elite do need some skin camouflage sometime.I hope they'll consider you.
Best wishes.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #5
thanks for taking the time to reply.as much as i like my tattoos i would gladly remove them for a military career but i can't afford it and it takes a long time.i would greatly appreciate somebody serving or something to give their opinion as to wether they'd take me with them or maybe even take and i.ll have them removed while serving france.i just want to get in :-( once again thank you for taking the time to reply
Best just talk to the recruiting office direct and ask the question - anything else may be outdated or incorrect information. If the answer is a "no" then you can always come back once you've had the tattoos removed if you can.
The British army website doesn't list tattoos as an issue - not sure about the FFL,
Ian
Well if you say anywhere then I bet there's tons of third world countries that don't have particularly strict rules. If you like Sub-Saharan Africa that is.
On a more serious note, I suggest actually contacting recruiting offices (by phone or email) from different countries and asking. I know the Chechen btlns in the Russian Army are allowed to grow ridiculous beards. (or at least that was the policy before the reforms). So you might be able to find if not entire militaries at least units that would take you despite the tattoo.
On a more serious note, I suggest actually contacting recruiting offices (by phone or email) from different countries and asking. I know the Chechen btlns in the Russian Army are allowed to grow ridiculous beards. (or at least that was the policy before the reforms). So you might be able to find if not entire militaries at least units that would take you despite the tattoo.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #8
Thanks for the reply,i've emailed the legion several times without response and cannot find a telephone number :-( i will keep trying while training with the mentality that i'm going.i will look for contact details for russian militaryWell if you say anywhere then I bet there's tons of third world countries that don't have particularly strict rules. If you like Sub-Saharan Africa that is.
On a more serious note, I suggest actually contacting recruiting offices (by phone or email) from different countries and asking. I know the Chechen btlns in the Russian Army are allowed to grow ridiculous beards. (or at least that was the policy before the reforms). So you might be able to find if not entire militaries at least units that would take you despite the tattoo.
Does anybody else have any suggestions?
Thanks again for th reply
I once heard that the US Army was pretty much desperate to find more recruits to send to Iraq. Apparently they even took people who normally would be considered to be too old and gave out green cards to foreigners in exchange for a tour in Iraq. I guess that isn't so anymore now that most of the troops are or will be withdrawn soon, but perhaps they still search for people to send to Afghanistan? In any case, if the US Army trades college educations for recruitment, maybe they would also consider to pay for a tattoo removal procedure?
I know that there is rumor that the Marine Corps are planning to change the tattoo policy to allow sleeves again. But facial tattoos are pretty unlikely.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
USMC tattoo policy is very strict. The latest "clarification" was in Feb which tightened the rules further.
Corps clears up tattoo policy
No chance of facial tattoo getting in, even as US is recruiting like 8000 foreign nationals for military service annually with the green card enticement.
US army tattoo policy.
http://www.usarec.army.mil/HQ/recruiter/downloads/TATTOO POLICY.doc
Unlikely. They clarified the rules in 07 to outlaw sleeve tattoos but allowed those with existing prior to 07. It was tightening a loophole.
USMC tattoo policy is very strict. The latest "clarification" was in Feb which tightened the rules further.
Corps clears up tattoo policy
No chance of facial tattoo getting in, even as US is recruiting like 8000 foreign nationals for military service annually with the green card enticement.
US army tattoo policy.
http://www.usarec.army.mil/HQ/recruiter/downloads/TATTOO POLICY.doc
Last edited:
New Commandant. I'm well aware what the current rules are, but there has been quite a bit of talk that Gen. Amos will loosen the restrictions. Naturally either way those who grandfathered into the system will be fine.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Links were posted for those who do not know the current policy.
Just wanted to highlight the trend is towards tightening.
There was a lot of talk in 09 that the regs would be relaxed as well but it went the other way instead. New Commandant is not a new marine. 3 years prior as asst commandant. If there was any issue with the tattoo policy, it would have changed by then.
My assessment: unlikely.
Interesting choice for new commandant (aviator). Noted Gen Amos took over in Oct 10.
Links were posted for those who do not know the current policy.
Just wanted to highlight the trend is towards tightening.
There was a lot of talk in 09 that the regs would be relaxed as well but it went the other way instead. New Commandant is not a new marine. 3 years prior as asst commandant. If there was any issue with the tattoo policy, it would have changed by then.
My assessment: unlikely.
US Army policy on tattoos for procurement is fairly lenient - for a facial tattoo you would have to get some kind of exception to policy.
I did enlist a young man who had a major league baseball team logo tattooed on his neck below and behind his ear, and tattoos on the back of his hands. It required an exception to policy signed by our commander, who had to view the tattoos and rule that they were not "prejudicial to the good order, morale, and reputation of the Army, etc."
You can always get it removed - painful and expensive though.
As a US military recruiter, one thing I would like to clear up is the impression that because of current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan that the US Armed forces have lowered their enlistment standards. This is simply not true. There was a bit of scare in 2005ish where there were some dire predictions about falling recruiting numbers in the media, and the US military did beef up its recruiting efforts as a result - by increasing bonuses, fielding more recruiters and spending more money on marketing rather than any significant relaxing of standards. Ultimately this proved to be a boy who cried wolf scenario, the serious recruiting problems never materialized and by 2007-8 many branches were exceeding end strength.
Standards do change a little periodically. Typically they are a little more relaxed at the start of the fiscal year, and as branches begin to meet their recruiting targets as the year progresses, standards are tightened up.
Right now it is as difficult to join the US military as it ever was. ASVAB score requirements (the standardized aptitude test to join any branch of the US Armed Forces) are up, GEDs are generally no longer accepted in lieu of High School Diplomas, and waivers for conduct, etc almost non-existent. Enlistment bonuses are also pretty much gone as well.
A Pentagon Study has determined that 73% of American 17-25 year old are unfit for military service.
•Medical/physical problems, 35 percent.
•Illegal drug use, 18 percent.
•Mental Category V (the lowest 10 percent of the population), 9 percent.
•Too many dependents under age 18, 6 percent.
•Criminal record, 5 percent.
The real # is probably higher since most branches will only currently accept people in Mental Cat III or up, and some only want Cat IIIA and up (Air Force) or Cat II and up (Coast Guard).
A RAND Corp. finds that about ~ 30% of the adult US population is in Cat III and Cat IV which rules many of them out for military service in addition to the 9% of Cat V.
Asthma? Can't join. Food or Insect Allergies? Can't join. Eczema, Psoriasis or Dermatitis? Can't join. History of head injury (there goes all the High School football, hockey and lacrosse players) depression, mood disorders, or addiction? Can't join. Too fat? Can't join. Too thin? Can't join (not kidding) Too Tall or Short? Can't join. Too blind or deaf? Sorry! Heart murmur you never knew you had? Can't join. Criminal background? Sorry. Too many speeding tickets? Can't help you. Single parent too many kids? To many tattoos (depending on branch)? ADHD? Cutter? Faint at the sight of blood or needles (more of these than u think)? The list goes on and on. I spend more time saying no to applicants than any thing else these days! And the worse part is we still lose a lot of kids in Basic Training. They get injured easily - stress fractures in particular are real problem (not enough milk, too much coke growing up), or the simply can't hack being yelled at (first time for some of them) or being away from home.
Adrian
Adrian
I did enlist a young man who had a major league baseball team logo tattooed on his neck below and behind his ear, and tattoos on the back of his hands. It required an exception to policy signed by our commander, who had to view the tattoos and rule that they were not "prejudicial to the good order, morale, and reputation of the Army, etc."
You can always get it removed - painful and expensive though.
As a US military recruiter, one thing I would like to clear up is the impression that because of current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan that the US Armed forces have lowered their enlistment standards. This is simply not true. There was a bit of scare in 2005ish where there were some dire predictions about falling recruiting numbers in the media, and the US military did beef up its recruiting efforts as a result - by increasing bonuses, fielding more recruiters and spending more money on marketing rather than any significant relaxing of standards. Ultimately this proved to be a boy who cried wolf scenario, the serious recruiting problems never materialized and by 2007-8 many branches were exceeding end strength.
Standards do change a little periodically. Typically they are a little more relaxed at the start of the fiscal year, and as branches begin to meet their recruiting targets as the year progresses, standards are tightened up.
Right now it is as difficult to join the US military as it ever was. ASVAB score requirements (the standardized aptitude test to join any branch of the US Armed Forces) are up, GEDs are generally no longer accepted in lieu of High School Diplomas, and waivers for conduct, etc almost non-existent. Enlistment bonuses are also pretty much gone as well.
A Pentagon Study has determined that 73% of American 17-25 year old are unfit for military service.
•Medical/physical problems, 35 percent.
•Illegal drug use, 18 percent.
•Mental Category V (the lowest 10 percent of the population), 9 percent.
•Too many dependents under age 18, 6 percent.
•Criminal record, 5 percent.
The real # is probably higher since most branches will only currently accept people in Mental Cat III or up, and some only want Cat IIIA and up (Air Force) or Cat II and up (Coast Guard).
A RAND Corp. finds that about ~ 30% of the adult US population is in Cat III and Cat IV which rules many of them out for military service in addition to the 9% of Cat V.
Asthma? Can't join. Food or Insect Allergies? Can't join. Eczema, Psoriasis or Dermatitis? Can't join. History of head injury (there goes all the High School football, hockey and lacrosse players) depression, mood disorders, or addiction? Can't join. Too fat? Can't join. Too thin? Can't join (not kidding) Too Tall or Short? Can't join. Too blind or deaf? Sorry! Heart murmur you never knew you had? Can't join. Criminal background? Sorry. Too many speeding tickets? Can't help you. Single parent too many kids? To many tattoos (depending on branch)? ADHD? Cutter? Faint at the sight of blood or needles (more of these than u think)? The list goes on and on. I spend more time saying no to applicants than any thing else these days! And the worse part is we still lose a lot of kids in Basic Training. They get injured easily - stress fractures in particular are real problem (not enough milk, too much coke growing up), or the simply can't hack being yelled at (first time for some of them) or being away from home.
Adrian
Adrian
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Understand the max age is now 42 but could you perhaps shed some light on the avg age of enlistment?
Thanks for the detailed write up!
Understand the max age is now 42 but could you perhaps shed some light on the avg age of enlistment?
Really? Iirc we dropped 14 out of 83 in my platoon in boot. But only 3 of those actually got sent home. The rest simply went to the next company. Too thick or thing can be fixed while in DEP, and we did have some fatbodies and double-rats even in boot.
So the army seriously has a lot of drops for failure to adjust? Is this because it's easier to drop for failure to adjust? Because last I remember it was nearly impossible to get sent home from boot, short of huge injury, pre-existing condition you lied about, or failing the rifle qual something like 8 times.
I don't have hard statistics at hand, but based on my personal experiences and what I've seen from my fellow recruiters and at MEPS, 18-21 is probably the largest "demographic", followed by 22-26.
I see alot of kids 19-20, a year after HS who:
dropped out of college because it wasn't for them/were bored with it
dropped out of college because they ran out of money/were cut off by mom & dad
failed out of college (usually do to immaturity and partying rather than any intellectual failings)
never went to college, have shitty job and still live with mom and dad
I get also lot of college grads as well who want to do something out of the ordinary, or look at the job market and realize that their $160,000 degree in Early Medieval Basket Weaving is not likely to result in the lucrative and satisfying career they were deluded into thinking it would by the HS Guidance/College Admission/Financial Aid Industrial Complex.
Adrian
I can only speak for the Army but with the Army so close to end strength, and the new "kinder, gentler" approach, if someone at basic says "I want out" - they will generally get it after only a comparatively modest amount of being fucked with. Failure to Adapt, Failure To Meet Medical Procurement Standards, and even Refusal To Train discharges from BCT are all too common. The powers that be figure it's a volunteer Army, and if they really don't want to be there, then they're not doing anyone any good keeping them.
I'm really dismayed by the decline in discipline and basic soldierization in Army BCT which is a direct result of a public with little understanding of the military and it's culture, and parents who are horrified at the idea of their "child" being disciplined (in their minds "abused"). I recall in the mid 90's when a TV (60 Minutes or 20/20 or such) expose was aired on the practice of "blood wings" and "blood rank" in the Army. A handful of wussies complained, the media grabbed onto it, the public was "horrified" by such barbaric "hazing", and Generals lined up to deny they knew anything about it, declare such a thing was never permitted, and would be stopped (the same Generals who had their blood wings pounded into their chests as shiny new LTs).
Pathetic.
Adrian
Yeah. The situation happened in the Corps with posting and Blood Stripes (for NCOs). Although only last month a newly promoted SSgt got posted by several gunnies at our unit. Unfortunately for him the btln SgtMj was there, and immediately after the ceremony the SgtMj gave the company like a 5 min speech on how that is hazing, and that is not accepted. I'm assuming they got a private conversation some time after that.
Although to be fair, occasionally when getting promoted we get a slap on the collar. Nobody really cares. Here they no shit drove it hard with a fist.
Although to be fair, occasionally when getting promoted we get a slap on the collar. Nobody really cares. Here they no shit drove it hard with a fist.