The U.S. Army is termed as the best in the world, but the questions on being in the army as a profession tend to tarnish the work and professionalism depicted by our military men and women. Traditionally, professions were termed as the type of jobs that require special training, skills, and a high level of education. Doctors, surgeons, lawyers, and managers dominated the examples provided for professional careers. The military due to its technicalities and physical requirements compared to need for higher education has been criticized not to qualify as a profession. I now support the notion that the U.S. Army has maintained its status as a profession.
Arguments for
The U.S. Army is still one of the highest employers in the country and has increased the requirements for its applicants that is the requirement of college graduation means that knowledge is critical. The Seal and other Special Forces requires more than nine months training in both skills, education, tactics, logistics, and leadership for a cadet to graduate as a Special Forces officer. The world is changing and with the criminals and terrorists becoming more technical and attacks being more complicated, need of planning, leadership, and critical thinking are growing more necessary than ever. Therefore, the U.S. Army trains IT experts, doctors, and scientists to solve each resulting dilemmas 1 . Consequently, it is evident that the U.S. Army has maintained and exceeded its status as a profession. Other reasons for supporting the claim that the U.S. Army has secured its status as a profession is the code of ethics, free entry and exits, the diversity in the field of the military with different skills working as a team.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Arguments against
The critics of the U.S. Army argue that the soldiers in the field are merely robots who must follow orders even if following rules is the wrong move. The killing of innocent civilians in Iraq by the U.S. Army is one of the weak decision made that indicate deterioration of professionalism within the U.S. Army 2 . Others claim that the demoralization of the deployed soldiers in Iraq requiring more money to ensure they stay in Iraq is a testament that the U.S. Army is losing its status as a profession.
Conclusion
The arguments for and against illustrate the different aspects of the U.S. Army but it is evident that the increased training and complexity of the military job requires skills, knowledge and determination. The tasks are harder than they were due to the improved technology but the special training enhances the professionalism of the armed forces. The critics may be true in their arguments, but they must understand that the dead civilians may have been threats to the security of the U.S. Army or were caught in the crossfire and just as in other professions such as medicine loss of life is expected and can never be utterly mitigated. Therefore, the U.S. Army has maintained its status as a profession.
Bibliography
Stanley, Jay. "Book Review: The Future Of The Army Profession." Armed Forces & Society 29.4 (2003): 617-619. Web. 23 Jan. 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095327x0302900408
Zenko, Micah. "Opinion | Why Is The U.S. Killing So Many Civilians In Syria And Iraq?." Nytimes.com . N.p., 2017. Web. 23 Jan. 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/isis-syria-iraq-civilian-casualties.html
1 Stanley, Jay. "Book Review: The Future Of The Army Profession." Armed Forces & Society 29.4 (2003): 617-619. Web. 23 Jan. 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095327x0302900408
2 Zenko, Micah. "Opinion | Why Is The U.S. Killing So Many Civilians In Syria And Iraq?." Nytimes.com . N.p., 2017. Web. 23 Jan. 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/isis-syria-iraq-civilian-casualties.html
