1
   

Military Meets, Exceeds Goals

 
 
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 09:13 pm
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/12/12/160344.shtml?s=lh
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,934 • Replies: 49
No top replies

 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 09:17 pm
good for them....
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 09:42 pm
Glad you approve.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 09:58 pm
Yeah great, more young people to be put in harms way so Bush can make his friends rich. Glad your happy about that LSM (by the way, I really can't believe you are female).
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 10:09 pm
Green Witch wrote:
Yeah great, more young people to be put in harms way so Bush can make his friends rich. Glad your happy about that LSM (by the way, I really can't believe you are female).

Did i say that i was happy? Have you confused me with BPB? Who in the hell cares whether you can believe that I'm a female.
FYI-Nobody twisted these recruits arms, they volunteered. Now if rangler gets his way, those young people will be forced to enlist.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 10:45 pm
where'd that witch go? She/he comes in, leaves her/his droppings, then leaves. That ain't nice.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 10:55 pm
I am curious if these goals were lowered to take into account the increasing unpopularity of the war. Are these goals higher or lower than the same months last year, or before 2003 (when the war started losing popularity)?

I looked and couldn't find the recruiting numbers over time published anywhere.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 10:59 pm
Why is anyone responding to something written at newsmax.com?
0 Replies
 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 05:52 am
How many of these enlistees are from the bottom of the barrel?
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 06:40 am
None. They are all Americans wishing to serve their country in military service. Sorry if I tend to look at people and see their potential while you seem to want to classify people by their status/IQ/race or whatever you mean by "bottom of the barrel."
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 06:54 am
Quote:
"But we've had some problems in the last year with the number and quality of people coming into the armed forces. Generally speaking we've quadrupled the number of the lowest mental categories. We've quadrupled the number of high school graduates. We're putting 6,000, 7,000, 8,000 moral waivers into the armed forces."

The panel on Thursday said recent recruiting difficulties are a combination of a lack of emphasis on military service in society and the heavy deployment of both active duty and reserve forces. And the experts said if those issues aren't addressed, the recruiting difficulties will only grow, jeopardizing the readiness of the military.
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=40613&archive=true
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:38 am
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 09:46 am
CoastalRat wrote:
None. They are all Americans wishing to serve their country in military service. Sorry if I tend to look at people and see their potential while you seem to want to classify people by their status/IQ/race or whatever you mean by "bottom of the barrel."


People who are in political public life need to gloss over the obvious reality like this. People here (who aren't in public life) can tell the truth. We know better than this Coastal.

Military service is largely seen as a way out of poverty for many young kids who join. These are kids who join the service because they don't have many other opportunities.

Poverty is largely seen as a way to reach recruitment goals for many military recruiters. Kids who haven't succeeded in high school and don't have good employment prospects are seen as targets because recruiters know they don't hve many other opportunities.

Don't play the head-in-the-sand patriotism card Coastal. The majority of the kids signing up aren't the kids of Wealthy Americans (or Congress members). Or are you saying kids from lower class neighborhoods are more patriotic than your kids?
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 10:47 am
Our security guard enlisted with the Army. He's a Mexican from just across the river, Ciudad Juarez, Chuhuahua. One of the reasons he enlisted was to gain citizenship. He left for Fort Hood at the end of November. He's nineteen years old.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 10:50 am
It's odd that our Military Academies have never had any problem recruiting the best and the brightest. Odd.
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 10:56 am
I get it now. It really is the belief of the left that only the "dumb" kids end up in the military. Guess John Kerry didn't misspeak after all. Glad y'all cleared that up for me.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 11:00 am
ebrown_p wrote:
CoastalRat wrote:
None. They are all Americans wishing to serve their country in military service. Sorry if I tend to look at people and see their potential while you seem to want to classify people by their status/IQ/race or whatever you mean by "bottom of the barrel."


People who are in political public life need to gloss over the obvious reality like this. People here (who aren't in public life) can tell the truth. We know better than this Coastal.

Military service is largely seen as a way out of poverty for many young kids who join. These are kids who join the service because they don't have many other opportunities.

Poverty is largely seen as a way to reach recruitment goals for many military recruiters. Kids who haven't succeeded in high school and don't have good employment prospects are seen as targets because recruiters know they don't hve many other opportunities.

Don't play the head-in-the-sand patriotism card Coastal. The majority of the kids signing up aren't the kids of Wealthy Americans (or Congress members). Or are you saying kids from lower class neighborhoods are more patriotic than your kids?

What a crock. The post was in answer to someone saying "they're from the bottom of the barrel". you apparently agree with that sentiment. Is Webbs son from the bottom of that barrel as well? Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 11:09 am
You are twisting the issue.

The issue is that the military preys on many kids who are in poverty or in a difficult situation. This is why the majority of new recruits come from lower-class neighborhoods, and minorities are represented in the military ranks at a far greater percentage that would be expected if all Americans were equally "patriotic".

There are many people who were compelled to join for patriotism. Many of these people (like Webb's) are now disillusioned and bitter toward the military.

The topic is recruitment and the question is who are the people being recruited now and what tactics are being used to recruit them.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 11:15 am
I know that college is, or was, a big draw for my generation; the prospect of doing a short peactime tour and then getting bucks for school seemed attractive in the late 90's.

Today, it's enlistment bonuses, re-enlistment bonuses, stop lossing... a de-emphasis has been placed (from what I've read) on officers and 'middle managers' for the Army in favor of recruiting more line troops to make goals.

Goals which, by the way, have been reduced significantly. They don't mention that part when crowing about meeting the goals.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 11:18 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I know that college is, or was, a big draw for my generation; the prospect of doing a short peactime tour and then getting bucks for school seemed attractive in the late 90's.

Today, it's enlistment bonuses, re-enlistment bonuses, stop lossing... a de-emphasis has been placed (from what I've read) on officers and 'middle managers' for the Army in favor of recruiting more line troops to make goals.

Goals which, by the way, have been reduced significantly. They don't mention that part when crowing about meeting the goals.

Cycloptichorn


Care to provide some proof that they lowered anything?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Military Meets, Exceeds Goals
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 01:17:29