Who exactly is lacking a connection to our armed forces?

Posted By Froggy

Rep. Charles Rangel is no doubt sincere when he says that,

"No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq."

But he could not be more wrong. His impetus for proposing the draft he says is to shift the burden of defending America from the poor, minority community who are economically pressed into service to the rich, white community which has been shirking its duty and using the black man as cannon fodder to line whitey’s pockets. His basis for this policy change is also demonstrably false, but if he is sincere in this contention then I would have to question his sanity.

I was having a conversation with my mother this weekend about how it is that in school, girls are now catered to and boys are expected to conform behaviorally to what is essentially a female standard. It seems to me that the principle behind this mindset has, to a great extent, pervaded the society at large and the consequences of it can be seen in various places across the nation. The rise of the metrosexual man and more importantly the homosexual to a position of faddish stature in pop culture, the over representation of women in college, and the degradation of the volunteer soldier to the position of victim are some of the more obvious consequences of this philosophy in action. The philosophy of which I speak is, of course, liberalism and it is no surprise that a Democrat controlled Congress having given birth to these notions would go out of its way to promote them.

But there is a difference between a boy and a girl, a man and a woman, a warrior and a civilian. These differences do not disappear according to who is empowered in Congress or in the media driven culture, but the tolerance for the existence of warriors has shifted to some extent. The truth is that military service as a career is, for many, an extraordinarily fulfilling one and a place where the innate virtues of a man are completely validated. In the same way, a woman’s innate virtues are completely validated by nurturing children either as a mother or as a teacher. There are no politics in this observation, merely a statement of facts established over the past 10,000 years of human history.

Speaking as a Navy SEAL, to the extent that guys leave the Navy prior to retirement (as I did), it is a result of the fact that military service does not offer the opportunity to make a handsome living. In fact during the 1990’s when I was an active duty SEAL and the Naval Special Warfare community had not been to war in a significant way for more than 20 years, we felt as if we were members of a massively underpaid professional sports team that didn’t have any games to play-only practice. Imagine having a job where you work out every morning for 90 minutes on company time and then either go shooting, skydiving, ride on fast boats, blow stuff up, or go diving and travel the world for free. It is every man’s fantasy, but there is emptiness when you know that you aren’t training for the big game, but rather the paycheck. In fact, I used to refer to the Teams as "Naval Special Welfare" because it became a place by the end of the 90’s where tough men went to never grow up.

The complete fulfillment came when the opportunity to face the enemies of America came. It is in a man’s nature to protect, to compete, to overcome a challenge, to face danger, to be victorious. It is nice to get paid to have fun like an NFL player, but it is life enriching to win the Superbowl or make a headshot at 900 meters or to see the target of your DA wearing the door that you just breached. A warrior lives for the fight-and sometimes dies for it- but always voluntarily. I have often heard the cliché that "it is the soldier who prays most for peace, because he knows the horror of war." That may be true for soldiers generally, but for warriors I have not found this to be the case. I never felt that way (although I haven’t seen those horrors…yet) and very few SEALs have ever conveyed that sentiment to me. Quite the contrary, at this point in America, there is no one left in the military who has not re-enlisted since we have been in a state of war. Nobody is joining up for the GI Bill or for some advanced computer training; they are joining to fight for their country. Some for an enlistment, some for a career, but with the economy and record low unemployment, nobody is serving to escape poverty.

Contrary to Rep. Rangel’s misguided concept of military service, if I could have made $150,000+ a year as a SEAL, I would never have left. An empirical demonstration of this concept can be seen the in the security contractor world, where men with even quite modest military skill and experience can easily make such a living. For the warrior with a family, it is not the lack of economic opportunity that causes a man to join the military, it is the lack of economic opportunity, once there, that causes him to leave it. This is reality and it is precisely the opposite of what Mr. Rangel so foolishly babbles on about.

There is no question that since the election results earlier this month, many service members are wondering if they are going to be left hanging by the American people who seem to want to quit early on a military operation that those fighting believe they are winning. This has happened before and those who serve today are well aware of the way things went last time. But as difficult as it must be to fight and bleed for your country and come home unappreciated and derided, it might be worse to be pitied as a hapless moron duped by the Man and used for his enrichment. Today’s warriors are facing the prospect of both.

So instead of sending us cowards, metrosexuals, and the truly stupid to swell the ranks of the victim pool, why not just f*cking pay us what we are worth so we don’t have to give a damn about your scorn or your pity.

h/t Jimbo & Allah

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2819/6950675

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who exactly is lacking a connection to our armed forces?:

» Adam Henry: Charles Rangel from Cop The Truth
A lot of people seemed to take John Kerry's word for it recently when he claimed that his military insult was actually a muffed shot at the president. I didn't. As I said in this post, Kerry and his fellow [Read More]

Comments

[Uncle Jimbo]

I like the most when, as if awakened from a primordial real estate related torpor, Froggy lets rip.

If I thought we would ever pay "us" what we are worth, we would be splitting untold, uncounted millions. Let me know.

Cordially,

Uncle J

[Rich Casebolt]

I'd wager there are WAY FEWER qualified Special Warfare operators, in their respective branches of our armed forces, than there are major-league professional athletes.

Maybe we should be pushing George Steinbrenner for SECDEF?

On a slightly more serious note ... is part of the reason our warfighters are not paid at the level of, say, doctors or lawyers ... the aversion to creating a force of mercenaries? Has compensation been traditionally limited, to make sure that love-of-country is always part of the motivation for joining up?

Frankly, I think that you all should get paid at least as well as engineers like myself. That is some additional government spending I could definitely support ... which is saying a lot, coming from my parsimonious mouth.

[Derek]

What an a$$hole... How out-of-touch can one man be? I have a young cousin who became a marine last year. Before he joined he was a lazy little punk (My uncle's words, I hadn't seen him since he was a baby). I had the great honor of being present at the MCRD San Diego to watch over one-thousand young men become the greatest thing they will ever be... MARINES! You could see my tears of joy reflected in those of my Aunt and Uncle. What amazed me was learning that the Corps does this fifty weeks a year (on both coasts). My cousin Matt will always be better off for spending a few months with his drill instructers than anyone I can think of. Rangel and Murtha are NOT Marines in my eyes anymore. Shame on them for betraying our country and the corps.

I am sorry for this bad rant, but I don't have much time for anything better right now. I need some sleep so I can get up and run my business early tomorrow morning. I wouldn't have to work so hard if I could find some more marines to hire... Oh, sorry, they already do work for me!

[P2]

i has crossed my mind that we were like college football players that couldnt be paid out of respect for a certain reason.
i guess if you counted up the cost for all the fuel and ammo i burned up it might have added up to something neato,
but then there was the thought of knowing that i was serving in the same army that george washington served in that made the money question seem trifling.
rangel is a korean era vet that will always have a bitter taste in his mouth as most of them deserve to have. he just gives it that red tint.

[douglas]

Shouldn't we start an email writing campaign to target congressmen to get some legislation started to raise the pay of the military significantly? Appropriations committee or Armed services...

I for one don't see why PFC's shouldn't be making as much as new recruit Police officers in Metro areas.

Seems to me, given the much higer respect the American people have for the military vs. politicians and the media, that it would be a good political move.

[Rick Hoppe]

I sent the following to my Senators and my Representative.

I’m angry as I can be. Where are you? Congressman Rangel is slurring, insulting and slandering the members of the military with his talk of the draft and spouting that tired old saw that we joined because we couldn’t make it outside. Lies, and damned lies. But, where is the outrage? Where is the defense?

None of us can get in his face, throw the facts at him, and make him hear. But YOU can! Where are you?

We have a right to expect not just management from you, but leadership. Leadership without courage is management, and we have a right to, and do, expect you exercise moral courage.

Just in case you, like a lot of the Republican leadership, both past and present (not that there’s much difference) don't understand why you were ousted the majority, well, it wasn't about Iraq. It was because the party has been totally tone deaf on moral issues. Not the much-celebrated abortion issue, or gay marriage. How about Foley, PorkBusters, and the ability to spend money like it’s going out of style, all the while maintaining an air of elitism!

I expect, and also everyone that I will send this letter to expects, you to fight for and champion us, our rights, our dignity, or place within the grand scheme of this republic.

Everyone of my sisters and brothers who stand a checkpoint in 130 degree heat, walk the mean streets of the most dangerous city in the world, roll convoys through Ramadi, patrol Shah-E-Khot, or conduct free clinics and civic action programs in the boonies are watching.

Where are you?

This is being emailed to everyone I know, and also to MilBlogs, BlackFive and Captain’s Quarters. Sending me back a form letter (you know, the one that says “Thank you for your concern”) will get that sent out, too.

It’s time to end the tone-deafness, and to stand.

Stand with us.

Sincerely,

Richard A. Hoppe
CW2, USA (Retired)

I will post any answers.

[SGT Christopher Whitaker]

There is a reason that the military is rarely overwhelmed with applicants. Military service is a calling, especially now in our all-volunteer miltary, and comparitively few are called to it anymore. Our culture has changed fairly dramatically since the 40's and 50's, when such service was considered, and was called by government and society, both a duty and an honor. Now, "correct" society considers military service the last option of the "poor and disadvantaged," despite the fact that most military personnel come from middle-class families. However, with the continual drumbeat of Leftist selfishness, "multiculturalism," and feminizing of our young men, the call is becoming fainter and fainter for many young men. Fortunately, at the moment, there are enough of my comrades and I to keep the tradition alive.

[Chuck]

Rangel knows that what he's saying is utter b.s. It's all about the spin, baby. Say it enough and the media makes your dreams come true.

RLTW

Chuck

[shmopot]

To repeat the words of another blogger, all the Democrats won is a CHANCE. The big illusion Rangle is peddling needs to be punctured with a thousand facts. And we can hope for another "halp us jon kery” well aimed lampoon from our Troops. Rangle has not won a leadership position yet. He could go down big like Murtha. State Dem representatives need our letters/emails to know we are paying attention and will watch their vote.

[c/PVT Stephen]

funny I didn't know that I lost 125 pounds and am fighting the doctors so i can become an officer in the Army because I am somehow unemployable. I agree with the esteemed congressman about one thing, no one joins the military because of the money, we join for much more basic reasons, Adventure, Comradeship and shockingly because of love of country. I guess it never occurred to him that some people feel that it is their duty to serve their country and fellow citizens in some way, weather it is in the military, as a police officer or as fireman. oh wait that requires an understanding of the concept of duty, something congressman rangel obviously lacks. i understand that he served in Korea and did his duty back then, too bad he has lost the sense of duty he had back then.

[Peg C.]

Wow, Matt, now that is what I call a post! We need this from you. I remember being outraged during the Monica crap in 1998 when I found out Linda Tripp, your average low-level bureaucrat, earned (IIRC) well over $100K yearly. That ANY bureaucrat, nevermind the very mediocre quality of government workers that abound and without which D.C. could not function (oh how I wish it didn't), earns so much more than our special forces and all our warriors defending this country is simply beyond comprehension. The military should all be earning what they're worth, and government pencil-pushers as well -- which would cause a nice switch.

As for Rangel's "argument," I find it intellectually dishonest and internally inconsistent. Is he actually saying rich slugs in Harvard, etc., should be forced to serve, while those who volunteer now (out of patriotism, desire to acquire marketable skills, wish to serve a full military career, etc.) should instead be able or forced to...what? Work at McDonalds, Starbucks, Wal-Mart? Work at a corporation that will treat them like slaves and outsource their jobs? Become union members? Harvard and company have nothing but contempt for the military, ROTC, etc., and he wants to draft those lefty twits?

Lefties always yammer about how we should be free to do what we want, but it turns out that means what THEY want. They discount nature and individual ability completely. They live to pigeonhole us into politically correct roles. Screw that.

What you say about men and this society is absolutely true. It's called The Pussification of America and blogger/gun guru Kim du Toit nailed it under that title. Society is marginalizing the masculine and elevating the feminine, to the detriment of all. We need our nurturers but we need our protectors as well, and especially when the wolf is at the door. Human nature being what it is, the wolf is ALWAYS at the door. (With apologies to both the Laughing Wolf and Mr. Wolf!)

[Allan]

Here is a challenge for anyone living near a university, college, or even a high school.

Go on campus and do a survey. Ask two questions:

1. Do you have a close acquaintance who is in the military or who joined the military after September 11, 2001?"

2. Are you planning to join the military.

Unless you set up shop in or around the ROTC building (or are at TAMC (Texas A&M College)) or the JROTC room in a high school, I would be suprised if you received a positive response of greater than 30%.

[tom]

Why do the recruiters locally target the inner city schools much more than they do the rich white kid suburban schools? hmmmmmm

as for a pay raise? forget it. it's too expensive for the gov't. however if you were working for firm proving mercs the gov't would be more than happy to overpay you. afterall, they serve the special interest groups.

[JihadGene]

Froggy jumps dead-on into the sh*t, I mean onto Congressman Rangel.

[Giao]

"A man does not have himself killed for a half-pence a day or for a petty distinction. You must speak to the soul in order to electrify him."
- Napoleon Bonaparte

[Scrapiron]

Just start the enlisted men/women in the military at the same salary the freshmen congress critters get, and give the same annual raise, automatically. They do a hell of a lot more to earn it.

[CPLViper]

Tom ...

What you typed may be interesting to someone who shares your views which, in turn, would get a shake of the head and maybe a baaaaah from the sheep that your message reached. Preaching to the choir is like that, but here, you should site viable references to back up what you spewed. If not, we will all just dismiss your comment as leftist garbage.

[Geo]

Too expensive? I'd rather say this: "Billions for defence, not a penny for tribute."

Allan: You are entirely correct. The anti-military contengent on campuses is strong and still growing.

[Allan]

Geo,

It has little to do with anti-war/military sentiments.

for the challenge, only survey people who identify themselves as conservative or libertarian. I think you will find the same answers.

[rick]

Great post.
I must disagree with one point however. Every Veteran that I know that has re-up'd or extended, did so in spite of the fact that they know they would go back across the pond, not because of it.
To a man (and they are all good men) when they are asked by someone why they stay in they smply shrug their shoulders and say "because it's my duty (or a similiar phrase)." Honor and responsibility keep them in, not money; and definately not war. In fact, they dread going back to the hardships and horror of a warzone. They go back willingly and they fight hard, but anyone who tells you they want to go is either full of bluster and sh%t or has never been.
Of course this is speaking for a different military community. These guys are regular Army, not in the Special Forces nor are they SEAL's so it could very well be entirely different on your end.
Just my two cents...

[local girl]

Tom
Your "observsation" is ludicrous. We are currently on recruiter duty and live in a heavily democratic, rich, white neighborhood. There are recruiters everywhere, do your hw before you open your mouth. I totally agree with the way parents/society are turning our boys into sissys and feminine. I pray for my girls that they find a real man. They only have to look to their father for a role model.

[senorlechero]

Tom shows his ignorance once again. Recruiters don't "target" inner city schools, they visit every school.

What an answer to prayer people like Rangle and Tom are. Please Lord, let them keep talking

[Allan]

Rick,

It has been my experience that the re-up rate was not 100%. Many of those who would not re-up have been discharged as "personality disorders". Others have just used drugs so they could get out early.

I doubt you would go through the out-processing stations at Fort Bragg, Fort Carson, Fort Hood, Fort Campbell, etc. and find that soldiers are not being discharged.

The officer corps is suffering because many young captains are getting out and many LTCs and COLs are retiring upon eligibility, rather than going to war.

On the other hand, I know many soldiers who have re-enlisted, and many who have re-enlisted early. And I know many field grade officers who have not been allowed to go to Iraq, who are champing at the bit to go.

[rick]

Allan,
You misunderstood. I'm not saying 100% of Soldiers are re-up'ing, I'm just saying that 100% of the one's I know are doing it for the reasons I stated above.
Absolutely, some are getting out and having issues; war can f&*k with a person's head. God Bless those who are struggling to find their way.

As for your last comment about the field grade's that are chomping at the bit to go; once again, that's my point. They are chomping at the bit b/c they haven't been there yet. Don't get me wrong, I like them, was chomping at the bit the first time b/c I felt left out of the action and that I was shirking my duty. However, I still truly beleive that once a soldier has seen war and it's cost, it is the LAST thing he ever wants to go back to and he'll tell you so. I firmly beleive that that makes him no less of a warrior, rather a better fighter and Soldier for the experience he/she has. This was the only point I disagreed with in this post.

[jordan]

rick -- good point, the full understanding that they'll return to those horrors is what makes them warriors and heroes. And no less for those "chomping to go" without fully appreciating what they're getting into.

It's important for accurate info to be out there about who is in the military, and why they are there. It's equally important in this democracy to know who is in the mainstream media and why they are there, given how reliant the electorate is on the MSM to decide their votes.

What is the background of most journalists? The last time this was looked into I recall many of the prominent ones being surprisingly weak both on credentials for covering their areas of responsibility, and education in general. Seems the media have the same recruitment quality issues they claim the military has.

[tom]

Ignorance? Hardly, I speak from my own experience, my kids experience and friends experience.

But if you read carefully, you'd see I wrote "LOCALLY". Doesn't mean nationally, but if it's going on locally it probably is going on nationally as well. Same reason the army had to "retrain" recruiters earlier this year due to their overly aggressive tactics.

and lastly, I don't care what tactics they use at their recruiting stations, but to allow them access to kids without parental supervision is deplorable. But of course those that wrote the law don't give a shit. Their kids go to private and/or rich suburban schools.

so tell me again how equitable the system is.

[Allan]

Jordan,

A vast majority of those born after 1955 in this country have not been in the military.

It is likely that a large majority of this country does not have a family member who has been in the military.

It is also likely that a large plurality of this country does not know someone who was/is in the military after 9/11/2001.

Among that plurality, it is likely that a majority of those are in the upper middle class. And it is likely that a good number of those in college are in the plurality.

What is seems that Congressman Rangel is getting at is that it seems as though the influential members of society do not have a personal stake in the war.

I do not know if what they say is true. But, it may be. It certainly is inflammatory.

[Froggy]

Allan,

If you don't know if what they say is true it seems to me that you have a choice to make. A) Find out. B) Shut your hole. There is no responsible option C.

Tom,

Recruiters do not have to be allowed onto private school campus' precisely because they are...private. That decision is made by the school not the recruiter. Besides, I am dubious that your casual observation of recruiter activity is anything that can be relied upon to establish an argument. See options A & B above.

[mahoney]

I spent a few years in 1/75 RGR Battalion and can say it was the best time of my life. To put it in context - I enlisted (not was commissioned) after I graduated with a degree in engineering from UW (good school, good degree).

So why did I get out? Two reasons. First - as was mentioned the training tempo was so high that there was not time for anything else. This did not bother in of itself, rather when the training evolutions began to repeat themselves one begins to question whether you get an opportunity to use the training.

Second - the compensation plan sucked. It was not that I ever thought I would get rich as a warrior, but what pissed me off to no end was that some 2nd LT with no knowledge or experience than I was making more that I would ever make as an NCO. So my choice was accept the pay, go to OCS or get out. I chose to get out.

[Allan]

Tom,

I just have my anecdotal experiences. But, I went to school with the children of the wealthiest and most influential people in Dallas. 90% of my classmates claimed to be Republicans. None of those children enlisted (with the exception of one who joined the Coast Guard Reserves) and three of my class became officers.

I went to graduate school at SMU. One of my classmates was a FLEP. 95% were Republicans. I was the only one to join the Army.

Simply put, the military was not an option for the vast majority of my high school classmates, all of whom went to college. This may have changed after 9/11, but it is not reflected in the alumni letters.

[RTO Trainer]

Allan,

Lets look at a few numbers, shall we?

There are roughly 3,000,000 high school Seniors graduating every year.

Current requirements by the Army to meet it's annual recruiting goal are somewhat less than 90,000.

That's 3%.

Incidentally, of course college students aren't planning in large numbers to enter the military (certainly not your very generous 30%! See what happens when you make up statistics?). They are in college. They've already made their plans, which is why recruiting generally focuses on high schools. They haven't made those decisions yet.

[Allan]

I never said that 30% would go into the military. I said I would be suprised if 30% knew someone who was in the military OR were thinking about going into the military.

As for 90,000, I think your numbers are low for the entire active armed forces. I would think the number of recruits needed for the military (including the Coast Guard and the Reserves) is much higher.

When I entered college, I was not thinking about joining the military. In fact, it was not until my final year of graduate school that I decided to join (this was after the Gulf War).

My point is that, in my small circle of acquaintances (outside of the military), I know of one person other than me who was involved in Iraq, and I only know of him because I read it in an alumni letter. Were I not in the military myself, I would have no personal stake in this war. And, that may be the case for a great numbero of people in this country. It is shameful.

[RTO Trainer]

How could anyone in this country not have a personal stake in this war? Sounds like a fundamental misapprehension of what the fighting is about.

Many many people not getting it, I believe.

Sorry for the misread onthe 30% number. Please note, I stipulated that the 90,000 was for the Army alone. I don't knwo what the requirements for the other services are, but I do know that the Army's requirement is the largest.

I also did not join until after college (the very day I finished my final credit in fact). You and I represent a very small minority in service in that respect.

Incidentally, for anyone who does not know someone serving, I consider that a reflection on that individual, and a poor one, and not an indication of anything else.

[Telmah]

This debate about recruiting misses the point. The question we should ask is:
What can we do?
I am thankful to be an American. But I am worried and I talk about my fears for the future with my friends. Because I read and I am not afraid to share what I have read (My current reads are "Cube and the Cathedral" and America Alone") I am often approached by friends to comment on recent headlines etc.
So whenever anyone asks "well, what can I do?" there are a series of potential answers. I challenge the entire blogosphere to take up this question and debate it.
My suggestions:
-ENLIST -If you are of age, enlist. (I just enlisted again as a reservist at the age of 34, it has been 12 years since I last served and the army is short on reserve officers at this time.)
-TEACH -If you are recently retired or thinking about returning to the workforce (a conservative mother who's kids are in school, etc) then teach at a local high school. Take the schools back from the liberal brainwashers!
-BE FRUITFUL -Have more children. 2 to replace yourselves, one to replace a blue stater (see Mark Steyn's "America Alone"), and one for America. Have a minimum of 4. Yes, you may have to sacrifice a little comfort, or retire a little later. So?
-LEAD -Run for local office or support someone who is. Most local political jobs are part-time. Start taking back our government from the career politicians who live on entitlement incumbency protections. Heinlein wrote a little-known book called "Take Back Your Government" that provides a simple, practical way to get politically involved.
-PRAY -Join a church community somewhere. Get involved. Pray. Start conversations about the challenges facing us. Step out of the way and listen.

So the next time someone asks, "What can I do?" Tell them.
I hope many of you can devote an entire post to this. I do not want to be the message, so if you choose to take this challenge, please just make this list your own, or quote me without a name.

[tom]

Allan, that's exactly my point. Most elitists, rich and especially politicians, send their kids to private schools where they aren't subjected to 'no child left behind' recruiting tactics.

The average joe isn't wealthy enough to send their kids to private schools. so instead they go to public school where they are subjected to recruiters. Something that probably be done w/a parent at their side.

[dont get me wrong, I'm not saying there's anything wrong w/choosing the military as a career. I simple disagree with the tactic of sticking recruiters in public schools wit kids and there is not a damn thing that can be done about it.]

[rick]

Tom,

Parents are involved in the process. They have to be if the child is a minor.

Haven't you noticed the multiple Army commercials that continually show a kid thinking about joining and trying to get the parent to listen to them. The hold "Parents listen to your kids meme."

I guess I don't see where you are coming from. The recruiter doesn't swoop in and put the kid on a bus going to some camp after recess is over. What's wrong with going in to a public school and giving a kid an option?

If a private school chooses not to allow recruiters, that's their right. If a parent can afford to send a kid to a private school, that's their right. Freedom to make these choices is why alot of "disadvantaged youths" join up. If not for them, maybe so they can make a little more money and give their kids more options. Is it better to not go into a public school's, not at least let the students know they have options?
I ask in all seriousness....

[Synova]

Recruiters in schools has nothing to do with "no child left behind." Recruiters have always had access to public schools even long before anyone ever heard of leaving children behind. It's just that parents didn't used to complain about their poor babies talking to military recruiters.

My school actually set up a mass ASVAB testing and let us out of class.

If you really *do* believe that the military is an appropriate choice of career, why bar them and allow other career recruiting such as from colleges? Students deserve information and deserve to make their own choices. Or is the issue really that the military is NOT seen as an appropriate career choice and people are trying to discourage students from getting information by talking to recruiters?

Underage students CAN NOT join the military.

Knowing what the requirements are for military enlistment *may* keep some students from drug or police involvement. (Or getting tatoos in the wrong places.)

As for actual data... a disproportionate number of recruits come from rural areas... NOT inner cities. They *do* have numbers on this you know. Recruiting is actually under-represented (by number of recruits) in the poorest neighborhoods. It's like a bell curve or something... most recruiting happens in the middle.

[rick]

Whoops,
Should have said "Is it better to not go into a public school to let the kid know he has options?"

[Synova]

Oh, and it *may* keep some students in school. If the miltiary is seen as a way out of a neighborhood, an economic necessity, and something that is actually *possible*... talking to a student even a few years before he or she (mostly he) is old enough to enlist *may* provide the motivation to stick it out and graduate, stay away from drugs and cops, because they *know* if they do, that they will have somewhere to go.

"...but to allow them access to kids without parental supervision is deplorable."

Right.

It is *still* true that recruiting numbers show fewer recruits from the poorest neighborhoods, most from the middle, and a disproportionate amount from rural middle-America.

[Allan]

I joined the Army to see the world. It was not just a job, it was an adventure. I was in the Army of One and I am Army Strong. And, my parents supported my choice.

The Army lived up to its bargain. In my book, there is NO better job in the US for an 18 year old looking for direction. Three square meals and a cot. You get to use amazing weapons. You can get the GI Bill. And, you have $1,000 per month left over for anything you want. Even going to war can have some good points.

(The worst jobs in the US for an 18 year old with a spouse and a child(ren) may well be junior enlisted).

But, that is from someone who never attended boot camp or had to follow orders from an asshole first sergeant or sergeant major. Anectodally, I hear the same thing from soldiers who have received an honorable discharge.

[The Conservative Insurgent]

[dont get me wrong, I'm not saying there's anything wrong w/choosing the military as a career. I simple disagree with the tactic of sticking recruiters in public schools wit kids and there is not a damn thing that can be done about it.]

How are they "subjected"? And how is a military recruiter different from a college recruiter or a vocational recruiter? Who the hell is anyone to say that it's okay for a teenager to be recruited for college, vo-tech or some trade but not the military? The military is one of the few professions left where anyone can advance as far as they can on their merits alone. My Lord, my first sergeant when I took command was a Lebanese immigrant who fled the civil war. I had soldiers in my first platoon as a LT who left the inner city and I met them on the battlefield as NCOs when I was in command. I've had soldiers with graduate degrees, former stock brokers and yes, some from the lowest rungs of our society. Hell, I'm a product of food stamps, free lunch and a public education who sure as hell joined to serve my country, not because I needed a handout to succeed. Now, I'm an infantry major who looks forward to redeploying so I get another crack at the a**holes who threaten my country and my way of life.

I am sick and f**king tired of people impugning my chosen profession as if we're pimps, convicts and murderers. And then to top it accuse me and my brothers from taking advantage of the poor and helpless so that we can fill our ranks (and absolving the teen's parents or guardians from any sort of responsibility in helping them choose the direction they wish to take in life). I weep when the day comes that young men and women of all walks of life won't defend their nation from the dangers it faces.

The great thing about my rant...my experience is not unique. It is shared by all who join to defend an idea worth defending. If the military is so bad, why does it consistently rank as the most respected profession in our country? If it is so bad, why are former military so coveted by headhunting organizations to hire. Because we get things accomplished. We're disciplined. We act and don't look around for approval.

Stepping off my soapbox now,
The Conservative Insurgent
MAJ, IN

[Froggy]

According to this organization http://www.capenet.org/facts.html#trends the Council for American Private Education, private school enrollment is 6,256,000 students constituting 11.5% of the student population. Be advised that this figure includes ALL students in all grades not just High School which particularly applies to this debate. Of that 6.256M students, 982,192 (15.7%) attended Non-Sectarian private schools in 99-2000. The average tuition for religious schools was $5700/yr while Non-Sectarian was $14,600/yr in 99-2000 for the secondary level.

Extrapolating these figures, I think that it would be fair to say that the 982k students of high tuition, Non-Sectarian private schools would be the place where the evil rich whiteys are hiding from military service. This group of Americans constitutes a whopping 1.8% of all American students. Interestingly, 82% of families earning more than $75k/yr (evil rich whiteys) actually send their children to (gasp!) public school, and their demon seed is therefore subject to harassment by military recruiters without limitation.

So basically Tom, you are an evil white devil who, like Charlie Sheen's noble character in Platoon, lowered yourself to serve with us servile peons in the military and for that I worship you sire. That said, the numbers and your contentions of their significance to the nation at large are completely irrelevant.

I chose option A, you might have chosen option B, but you went with option C) irrelevant jackassery. Nice going.

[senorlechero]

Tom, oh, ok, so you've been hanging out at the inner city schools? or is it the rich suburban schools? Both? Where exactly did you get this "local" knowledge? Do you know anyone who was "recruited", or are you basing your comments on some "report"? As I said before, you are ignorant and don't know anything about military recruiting (except that you don't like it) WAJ

Allan........guess what? The vast majority of people born before 1955 have never served in the military either

Telmah........great post!

[local girl]

tom
Recruiters (i'm speaking of Army only) go to their assigned schools ONE day a week. They check in with the career/guidance counselor show their id and then visit with the kids. Follow up calls are made and an appt is set to meet with them. Recruiters do extensive research for students who are debating what they want to do. The recruiters then give them the presentation almost always with parents present. They show them the college route and then the military route. Your idea of railroading and giving the perception that they are trying to get your kids or your friends kids is just plain silly. Why don't you call your local recruiter and go on a visit with them. Either to the schools or on a home visit and get a first hand knowledge of their job. Recruiters work long, hard hours trying to help this country. Most get selected and don't volunteer for this duty because of the likes of people like you. Keep beating them up...shameless.

[bthun]

Do not kids under 18 still require a parent to authorize in writing that the 17 year old can sign up?

After a person reaches 18 years of age, they should have enough sense about who they are and what serving in the military means. They are considered to be of the legal majority, adults under the law, right?

Also, if the 18 year old can not or will not confide/consult in their parents, that to me indicates that they have fairly serious issues at home and the military might be a good place to get on a path towards all the attributes associated with honorable service to country. Some of those attributes being a sense of duty, dependability, learning about self, learning how to be part of and be willing to give all to something larger than self, a desire to and the forging of the will to succeed.

The typical (if there is such a thing) 18 year old today, in this country, is not an ignorant, unsophisticated little person, without access to information, at least compared to thirty*mumble* years ago when I was an 18 year old volunteer. Today's 18 year olds are not stupid.

Sorry, but I just can't put the picture of recruiting on campus together with all the predatory images conjured up by all the yelping over the issue.

[Tracy]

I have one question for Tom and his attitude toward recruiters:

how is what they do any different than the colleges that come in to recruit???? would you say the students are being "subjected" to college recruiters??

They are there to give the kids options. ALL their options. Not everyone is cut out for college. My brother-in-law hated school. He works a job with his hands (which is what he's good at) and makes more money than my college educated husband. college education does not = money in the pocket. It was an option he chose. My husband chose his option. Both chose what was best for them and what they would be good at.

My husband contemplated joining the Marines (his father was a Marine). He chose not to b/c quite frankly, though I love him, he does not have a "warrior spirit". So, while he believed the military to be a respectable option, it wasn't for him.

And I am a college graduate that stays home with her kids. I have the option to work, but chose to stay home because that is where I feel I am called to be. OPTIONS.

Recruiting is all about letting the kids know their options~ALL of them!

[D.Smith]

Notice that many of the same people who scream for parental notification for recruiters' access to high school age kids are more often than not the same people who think its OK for a minor female to get an abortion WITHOUT parental notification. Just something to think about. Also, I don't know the numbers for 1st year college drop out rates, but I know it is significant. This means that a large number of students were not ready for or mature enough to handle college or university out of high school. All of us who have served honorably know what military service does for ones maturity level. Mlitary service will more often than not make one a much better, disciplined student. This hysteria over recruiters' access to student is just more left wing propaganda in the schools systems.

[Darthparrish]

Wow there is a lot of info to digest in these posts and im kind of sad that i couldnt get into the discussion earlier, and give my "buddy" TOM a helping hand, since we seem to agree on a lot of the issues being presented.

First off Telmah,
That list of yours was probably one of the dumbest things i've ever read. For one, Conservatives having more children is not going to ensure that there are more conservatives in the world, unless you plan on doing a lot of brainwashing. People make their own choices based on what they believe, not what others force them to. Secondly i love you statemnt "Take the schools back from the liberal brainwashers!", because it just shows how stupid/paranoid you are. There isnt any "liberal brainwashing" going on in highschools. The only brainwashing that goes on is how the students are lied to about history and not told all the facts, which has no leaning liberal or conservative. Which your solution seems to suggest that you would want people going in and brainwashing the students to be conservatives, which would be just as bad. Finally, I really dont even need to get into it about what praying is going to do for you, because i could say a lot on the subject, but in short my response would be that is a bunch of BS.

[Darthparrish]

Now on to the subject of recruiters:

When people say that "the majority of people recruited in the military are from poorer communities"(or something similar), its a statement that isnt exactly true as it is said, but has elements of truth in it. What i mean is this: No the majority of recruits are probably not from poor communities. However, the vast majority of the students from poorer communities end up going to the military, in many cases because they have no other choice. Now some of you may say, well they are doing it out of patriotism, duty, honor, etc. While that may be true for some of those kids, it is not true for the majority. I dont think that someone that is joining the military out of duty or patriotism would make their first question to a recruiter: "Would i have to fight in Iraq?" I would venture to say that someone joining for the reasons you claim would be asking this instead: "Can I fight in Iraq?" Which i dont think many of those kids being recruited in those poorer areas or anywhere else for that matter, are asking the latter.

Also the tactics used by military recruiters in a lot of cases are dishonest or intimidating. They either flat out lie to a kid and tell them that they wont get shipped off to Iraq or that it isnt any more dangerous in Iraq than it is America. The intimidation they use is when they basically wont take no for an answer and then use psychological techniques to persuade them into joining, in many cases by making them feel uncomfortable and unsure about their future.

[Darthparrish]

The money issue is a basic one:

The country cant afford to pay its soldiers as much as they would pay a congressman as some of you have suggested. It would be unfeasable since we are already spending billions and billions on the military. What you are suggesting is to raise their wages by almost ten times what they make now. I dont think that tax payers want to spend trillions of dollars on salary increases of that magnitude. Now if you were to suggest a more realistic goal of pay increases you might have a case.

[Billy Oblivion]

"Nobody is joining up for the GI Bill or for some advanced computer training; they are joining to fight for their country. "

I "just" (within the last year) finished an Air Force 3 level school (I'm an almost 40 year old upper middle class white male who passed on a 6 figure job to go BACK into the reserves after a 10+ year break in service) and about 1/2 the class DID sign up for school/training or to get the hell out of a bad economic situation--only three or four were assigned to "combat comm" units, and they were NOT happy about it.

The poorest kids were white, and many had military in their families.

Now, onto idiot Tom.

There is a reason recruiters seem to target "poor" schools, and it's the same one that Willie Sutton gave when asked why he robbed banks.

"Because that's where the money is"--or in this case "that's where the recruits are"

Those inner city schools are *bigger* than suburban schools (which it has been pointed out also get visits from Recruiters) and they have a lot of middle class, lower middle class and "working poor" students.

These are the primary recruits for the military simply for statistical reasons--there are a lot more of them than there are rich people.

There are only a 793 billionares in the *world*, and there are only 7.5 million millionaires in this country (note that this is defined as having NET WORTH of a million dollars, not having a million in the bank. A plumber in Palo Alto who bought a house 30 years ago and just paid it off is a millionare even if all he can afford to drive is a 3 year old honda civic).

There just *aren't* that many children of rich parents, and they are as likely to go to college and become officers as not.

In middle and upper class families people PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, that's why the AREN'T POOR. Middle class and Rich families are also more likely to expose their children to a wider slice of life (because they can afford to, because they want to, and because they know it's good for their children) (these are tendancies. There are poor parents who try to expose their children to as wide a choice as possible, there are poor parents who push their children to do better. These are the minority).

This means that in the "more affluent suburbs" a 17 or 18 year old kid is more likely seek out the recruiter (I never spoke to my recruiter at highschool, I went into his office during the summer between my Junior and Senior year. Of course this was back in the days when the Soviet Union was still a threat).

[local girl]

Darthparrish You seem a little "paranoid" about recruiters. There are a FEW bad apples in the whole bunch so don't generalize them all. Recruiters are taught in their almost two mos of school that the chances of these recruits going to war is over 60%. Again, I ask, have you ever been to visit a recruiter or followed him around. My husband is sick and tired of the likes of people like you giving his job a bad name. They don't use scare tactics ans lie. Although my husband has fought back the urge to cuss out a smart mouth punk kid, he respects his job and the Army. You for one need to get your facts straight about them. Read my earlier post about all the time and energy he puts into research for these kids. He will definitely not beg or use scare tactics to get some kid in who doesn't want to be there. Would you want that guy to be your battle buddy? He has to go back to the line after his 3 yr time. PS neither will the other recruits...the cost outweighs the gain ALWAYS!

[Oldcrow]

You are all missing the point Rangel(spit) is crazy like a fox, ask yourself why would he Skerry, Murtha and others say stupid crap like this? Well it is part of a plan that worked well for them in the Vietnam era here is how it goes. The vast majority of the military is committed to winning this war the re-enlistment rates in the combat zone prove this conclusively and the generals including the ones that are supposedly against it want to stay and finish the job however, the entire Dhimmi party is on record as against the war so how do you go up against the military without committing political suicide? Well you discredit them thats how, this is just the beginning first convince average Americans that the average enlisted person is a moron and a victim next start attacking the Officers as cynical uncaring bastards that exploit peoples disadvantages to dupe them into enlisting and then send them to Iraq as useful dupes. At this point you can tell the American public not to listen to the troops and to view what the Officers are saying with heavy suspicion and you know better than the military what needs to be done. It is a very Machiavellian way to discredit the military.

[Blacksheep]

Like Billy Oblivion, no recruiter ever visited the prep school I attended; I found my own way to the US Army recruiting office. Both of my parents were doctors, I had essentially a full ride to private college and opted to ENLIST with an 11B contract to the 82nd. I made E5 in under two years and picked up some choice schools in the process.

Far from having no other option than "escaping to the military," I joined out of a sense of duty and a recognition of the value of military service. I now, in my own business, earn far in excess of my prep school peers who went on to get MD's, MBA's and such while I did my tour in Iraq and other associated vacation spots. The experience I gained has been invaluable, taught by some of the best NCO's and officers on the planet.

I believe the Hon. Mr. Rangle is doing an enormous disservice to those "disadvantaged" young men and women he claims to be protecting through discouraging them from embracing the tremendous opportunity of military service. I didn't join for the 'educational value,' but did in fact ended up with an unparalleled education in the practical matters of life success; not just theoretical constructs, artificially created and observed in a sterile academic environment, but real sweat, blood and tears experience applicable to any pursuit -- military or civilian.

Unfortunately, I fear institution of a draft will remove some of the serendipitous rewards of service by diluting the ranks of all services with scoffers, gang bangers, and ne'er-do-wells, whose negative attitudes and propensity for duty-shirking will pollute the atmosphere of honor and duty. The Hon. Mr. Rangle, by accident or design, is slandering the protector as he deceives the protected.

[Darthparrish]

local girl:
"They (recruiters) don't use scare tactics and lie."

Nov. 3, 2006 — An ABC News undercover investigation showed Army recruiters telling students that the war in Iraq was over, in an effort to get them to enlist.

ABC News and New York affiliate WABC equipped students with hidden video cameras before they visited 10 Army recruitment offices in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

"Nobody is going over to Iraq anymore?" one student asks a recruiter.
"No, we're bringing people back," he replies.

"We're not at war. War ended a long time ago," another recruiter says.

Last year, the Army suspended recruiting nationwide to retrain recruiters following hundreds of allegations of improprieties.

During the ABC News sessions, some recruiters told our students if they enlisted, there would be little chance they'd to go Iraq.

Aslo beyond lies being told to potential recruits i found this information:

At least 35 Army recruiters, 18 Marine Corps recruiters, 18 Navy recruiters and 12 Air Force recruiters were disciplined for sexual misconduct or other inappropriate behavior with potential enlistees in 2005, according to records obtained by the AP under dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests. That’s significantly more than the handful of cases disclosed in the past decade.

Im not saying that your husband is one of the bad ones, but you have to admit that there are bad recruiters and that they do infact try to sell lies as facts to get impressionable kids to sign their life away.

[local girl]

darthparrish
we saw the same segment. As a matter of fact the recruiters called the others in the station to see it. That's horse crap what they did but look at the big picture. Those total recruiters (the ones cited for impropiety) are a drop in the bucket. There was a big scandal in Cali too but just try and imagine how hard it is now for our recruiters to gain trust. Trust from the parents, the kids and especially the schools. If any kid actually believes the war is over or that his chances of going are nill, I mean come on, you think they'll score high on the ASVAB? Where are all the news reports on the majority of recruiters just trying to do their job. Trust me when I say it is a long, thankless, family straining job. Six days a week working until 9 or 10 pm. Give our guys some slack and stop being judgemental. That's predjudice to me.

[Rich Casebolt]

Let me put it this way.

I have more trust in my local recruiters ... than I do in those who stand in front of their offices on Saturdays, holding signs like this ...

RECRIUITERS STALK OUR CHILDREN

... hand out DVD's of the infamous "Loose Change" video (a staple of the "911-was-a-government-plot" 911-Truther crowd ...)

... and are demanding the same access to the schools as the recruiters get.

Always keep in mind -- we have tried it their way ... diplomacy ... deference to the UN ...

... focusing on prevention of potential American error, over the prevention of the demonstrated intent of thugs with the power to kill thousands (if not millions ... to the point that we have more fear of our leaders' ability to act directly and decisively, than we do of the thugs' ability to do the same ...

... we have tried all this ... and found it wanting ... with NOT ONE THUG removed from power as a result of all this ...

... but with 3000 killed by just one small, relatively-weak group of such thugs, in ONE DAY.

The centerpieces of their worldview, when applied, DO NOT BRING PEACE ... despite their statements of peace as the objective.

They are far closer to being liars, than our current President and those around him ... and our recruiters.

Why should we trust their word? Why should we trust them ... over the Men and Women who back up their advocacy of military service, with their very lives?

[tom]

local girl, I have. go re-read my posts again and you'll understand my point. they aren't the perfect little group you like to think they are.

btw, unless the school says no, they can visit more than once a week.

[jordan]

Darth, why does the left demand that soldiers have motivations pure as the white driven snow for joining up? They accuse soldiers of having no other means of earning a living, and being poor and desperate, making such motivations seem base, and almost criminal.

Does every doctor become one out of altruistic concern for humanity, or to make a six-figure salary and play golf every Wednesday? Somehow, we seem to demand lofty, idealistic impulses in our soldiers, who must never be joining just for a last-chance salary.

Maybe its because they so often do have lofty, idealistic principles and senses of honor and duty. But the question of why they serve seems to be a morbid fascination for the left. Libs seem so disquieted by soldiers and the military. There's something there that just gets under their skin. Why?

Those who are the most critical of the military seem to insist on a high bar for why anyone signs up, and are accusatory about other motivations that they casually accept in other professions.

[Peg C.]

Froggy Matt, I think B5 Matt ought to make you Designated Asskicker here. You rock. As for that complete idiot Rangel and the rest of his buds, they delude themselves into believing that the majority of this country is in agreement with their blatant anti-American pacifism, and do so at their great peril. It's one thing to throw out big-spending bums; quite another to throw out America haters. I don't think Miss America can keep the yaps shut of all the moonbats in her party so this will be a treat. Most of this country does love our military, does hate our enemies, and does believe in defending us and going on offense when necessary.

And kudos to whoever reminded us that the military is the most respected profession and group of individuals in this country. Journalists and politicians are close to the least, and for good reason.

[local girl]

tom
where did you get the impression I said they were perfect? You take a few sorry recruiters and lump them all together, that's predjudice. I still ask you to go visit your local recruiter and follow him/her on an average day to walk in their shoes. Do you honestly think recruiters are "subjecting" our kids to the evils of the world? When the recruiters visit the schools, and btw many schools BAN our recruiters from campus and so it's phone calls only, they are looking for kids that are interested in seeing what the military can offer them. I can only speak of the recruiters in my husbands company and station. They are good decent men just trying to do their job. I know this may come as a surprise to you but many kids want to join to the chagrine of their parents. All of my husbands appts with HS kids have been with parents present. The only time there are no parents involved is the college kids. The parents of most of the kids have more questions for the reruiters than the kids. Please stop generalizing on behalf of a few, you only make it harder for these guys/gals to do their job.

[local girl]

tom
another thing that might surprise you, these kids are wanting to go in the Infantry and do the whole shebang. Ranger school, Airborne, etc. All of that is right up my husbands alley. He totally promotes the Infantry..there is no other job in the Army according to him. You're either Infantry or your support!!!

[woman warrior]

Bottom line: Everyone has different reasons for joining (financial, honor, pride, adventure, etc.) and recruiters are going to recruit where they have gotten recruits from in the past. There it is.

I am a Marine Corps officer who identifies herself as not only a woman, but a warrior in today's fight for freedom and the values of the United States. I am troubled by your insinuation that there is a "female standard" in colleges around the country and that women are being catered to. The reality is that the male standard, which has existed for thousands of years, is actually slowly eroding, causing insecurity in men who take comfort in knowing that masculine attributes will be positively compensated for in society (eg. physical strength, height, myth of "rationality" all have contributed to a patriarchical society). Now that women largely have the same opportunities as men, we see a change in the way society sees each of them. But the reality is still that this society is very patriarchical and men, even though we may see different perceptions in the media, have an advantage.

A byproduct of this increased equalization is women playing sports, going to college, starting businesses, etc. Now, the women out there who have the warrior spirit can pursue their life's purpose. Do you not want them by your side? Are you proposing that women can't fight too?

Women can be validated by the comraderie, espirit de corps, and virtues that a military career provides as well, not just by being a mother or teacher.

[Darthparrish]

Posted by: jordan | Nov 28, 2006 8:26:34 AM

Those who are the most critical of the military seem to insist on a high bar for why anyone signs up, and are accusatory about other motivations that they casually accept in other professions.

We arent saying anything bad about the people that have to join the military as a last resort as you made it seem. We are saying that in response to the fact that everyone seems to have this complex with thinking that everyone joins the military out of a sense of honor, duty, and patriotism, which just isnt the case.

[Cass]

Froggy, you rock.

Allan, it's Texas A&M University, not Texas A&M College. We're a little picky about that. I'd say the percentage is about 80-90% here.

[Akinoluna]

"In the same way, a woman’s innate virtues are completely validated by nurturing children either as a mother or as a teacher."

As a woman who doesn't enjoy "nurturing" children and hates teaching, excuse me while I go barf on your carpet.

[Akinoluna]

Oh and another thing...just because someone doesn't know anyone serving in the military doesn't mean it's a "poor" reflection on them. They can't help the fact that life hasn't brought them in contact with a servicemember.