Quote Originally Posted by Penta View Post
Societal expectations, I think. You can raise the same question with chaplains as you do with doctors (indeed, there's even *more* of a quandary there, it could be argued).

The reason why we have both, in some sense, is because we always have. If chaplains had never been a part of the force since before medieval times, and were proposed to be added these days, do you really think the incorporation of clergy into a military force like that would ever be countenanced? Similarly with doctors...If the question were being newly raised, today, would society, would the medical profession, countenance it?

In both cases, it would be up for debate, I think. (Query: After 1991, did the former Soviet states establish chaplains in their airmed forces? Are there any "First World" states which don't have chaplains?)

Meanwhile, these other professions you may have mentioned...They came of age, in most cases, quite recently (as recognized professions/fields of academia). They've built their whole identities in the societal conditions of the last 50-100 years, which tend to allow less for those in academic fields to apply their talents to war, it seems.
I like the doctors and chaplains as a basis for the new specialties. My thought would be that you bring them in young through ROTC, just like doctors or chaplains. They are uniformed officers - Civil Affairs Branch.