FWIW, supporting establishment usually means "not anywhere in the MEF." So it's the disbursing clerks, brig rats, and legal clerks who don't ever deploy that I think they're talking about.
Is there anybody here who thinks the CFT is a good idea? It was built because the PFT isn't an accurate measure of how fit Marines are to perform in any theater. MOST Marines and therefore units in the FMF (an aside, are we trying to get away from that term?)truly will benefit from the training required to perform well on the CFT.
I can definitely see both arguments. It starts to become a slippery slope when there's a standard that one group(ground MOSs) is to adhere to, but another group(wing MOSs) is not. It's like saying that aircraft maintainers don't need the rifle range or that aviators don't need to attend a full TBS. Perhaps the argument can be made, but at what point is one Marine not cut from the same mold as another? One may argue that our entry level training is the only wicket to get through, but I submit that if institutional standards in each community diverge at all, then you're not talking about two different communities, but two different institutions, and this is tacitly against the Marine ethos.
It's so tough...Which vat of Kool-Aid to drink out of is such a big decision.