Should War Supporters be Drafted into Active War Service

Some might enlist because the military is one of the few forms of employment open to them, I suspect. But that shouldn't mean putting their lives on the line for highly dubious political reasons or to support US business enterprises in situations like Iraq. My hunch is that not too many of the sons & daughters of the wealthy have rushed to enlist.

Are all these innocent lives actually worth this oil?

People can trade in their SUV's and start driving Hybrid cars, etc.

msolga wrote:

Some might enlist because the military is one of the few forms of employment open to them, I suspect. But that shouldn't mean putting their lives on the line for highly dubious political reasons or to support US business enterprises in situations like Iraq. My hunch is that not too many of the sons & daughters of the wealthy have rushed to enlist.

Nice spin. Now some facts.

Total US Military Active - Approx 1.4 million
Total US Citizens available for service - approx 134 million

That translates to about 1%.

Apparantly, not too much of anyone or any class. You can spread that 1% around any class you want, but many "affluent" attend the millitary acadamys or volunteer and most enjoy their experience and few are killed or injured.

Montana wrote:

Are all these innocent lives actually worth this oil?

People can trade in their SUV's and start driving Hybrid cars, etc.

No, they aren't. But we are a country of excess, and people are going to be hard to turn.

I mean, look at the Hummer. What the hell is that thing good for? People buy the gas guzzling (8 mpg) monstrosity because they can. People won't stop being stupid until it's either too late or they are directly effected by it.

woiyo wrote:

msolga wrote:

Some might enlist because the military is one of the few forms of employment open to them, I suspect. But that shouldn't mean putting their lives on the line for highly dubious political reasons or to support US business enterprises in situations like Iraq. My hunch is that not too many of the sons & daughters of the wealthy have rushed to enlist.

Nice spin. Now some facts.

Total US Military Active - Approx 1.4 million
Total US Citizens available for service - approx 134 million

That translates to about 1%.

Apparantly, not too much of anyone or any class. You can spread that 1% around any class you want, but many "affluent" attend the millitary acadamys or volunteer and most enjoy their experience and few are killed or injured.

It'd be interesting to see an actual breakdown of the numbers, based on class. Of ordinary troops.

Montana wrote:

Are all these innocent lives actually worth this oil?

People can trade in their SUV's and start driving Hybrid cars, etc.

No, they aren't. But we are a country of excess, and people are going to be hard to turn.

I mean, look at the Hummer. What the hell is that thing good for?

Bella Dea wrote:

Montana wrote:

Are all these innocent lives actually worth this oil?

People can trade in their SUV's and start driving Hybrid cars, etc.

No, they aren't. But we are a country of excess, and people are going to be hard to turn.

I mean, look at the Hummer. What the hell is that thing good for?

It is good for allaying the insecurities and inadequacies of those who buy them.

Bella Dea wrote:

Montana wrote:

Are all these innocent lives actually worth this oil?

People can trade in their SUV's and start driving Hybrid cars, etc.

No, they aren't. But we are a country of excess, and people are going to be hard to turn.

I mean, look at the Hummer. What the hell is that thing good for?

It is good for allaying the insecurities and inadequacies of those who buy them.

All the "ordinary" troops have officers that fight along side with them. To be an officer, one must have a college education and demonstrate the ability to be a leader. Many of those officers graduate from from military academies like West Point which have very strict admission policies and invite only the very best recruits from all strata of economic means.

But, your average private in the military is generally a high school graduate that chose the military as a either a temporary job (with many benefits over working McDonalds) or as a career. There are more privates that lieutenants serving in the front lines. But again, they come from all walks of life.

The military offers much to many.

Woiyo's snotty and typical conservative whine addresses none of the very good points Miss Olga brought up about the young men and women of the military risking their lives, being maimed and dying for the sh!ts at Haliburton, and Bechtel and all of the other bloodsuckers who profit because they're @sshole buddies with the Shrub and Cheney.

The point I was attempting to make is that there could well be a huge discrepancy in the wealth & power of the politicians & business interests who advocated & profited from, say, the invasion Iraq & those ordinary troops who are doing the actual fighting & dying.

The plain fact is that the income distribution of recruits is nearly identical to the income distribu­tion of the general population ages 18-24. Because we lack individualized household income data, our approach does not indicate whether or not the recruits came from the poorer households in their neighborhoods. Nevertheless, Chart 3 shows that the difference between the 1999 recruit distribution of ZCTA income and the population distribution is below a single percentage point for 19 of the 20 income brackets. Yet even these slight differences show a sub­tle pattern: Proportionally, both poorer and richer areas provide slightly fewer recruits, and middle-income areas provide slightly more.

This evidence directly contradicts Representative Rangel's claim that under­privileged Americans are the source of military manpower and that the privileged are underrepresented. In fact, Chart 4 shows that every ZCTA income bracket below $40,000 provided the same number or fewer recruits after 9/11, while all brackets above $40,000 provided the same number or more.( second graph above)

If facts about the statistical makeup of our military upset you, that's your problem.

woiyo wrote:

If facts about the statistical makeup of our military upset you, that's your problem.

That had nothing to do with my response--my response was based upon the venal and greedy motive of the Shrub and his Forty Theives of Baghdad. But Miss Olga has adequately addressed that--and the unbid sweetheart contracts which Halliburton and its subsidiaries and Bechtel received speak volumes about the motives of Cheney and his ilk.