Uncle Sam needs you, but doesn't want you!
As the number of military casualties in Iraq continue to ever increase, it should probably intrigue most people to know that the U.S. military shuns most people of recruiting age from serving. Anything from having a tattoo to having been prescribed ritalin will get you disqualified from military service.
Why is the military being so picky? David R. Segal explains that "[r]ecruiters are looking for reasons other than themselves...So they blame the pool."
With the number of total recruitments decreasing, how long can the military continue on with its current policies? One high school senior even found out how desperate some recruiters can become. Sooner or later, the military will have to make some dramatic changes.
BTW, I myself was rejected for service due to some health conditions. Oh well!
Why is the military being so picky? David R. Segal explains that "[r]ecruiters are looking for reasons other than themselves...So they blame the pool."
With the number of total recruitments decreasing, how long can the military continue on with its current policies? One high school senior even found out how desperate some recruiters can become. Sooner or later, the military will have to make some dramatic changes.
BTW, I myself was rejected for service due to some health conditions. Oh well!
posted by Perun at
2:49 PM
14 Comments:
I have a feeling China isn't so picky...
I can't speak for the Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard... but I can speak for the Marines.
Besides the usual minority that are unqualified for "the usual" reasons (medically unqualified, too many dependants, high school drop out, etc, etc), there has been a veritable explosion in recent years of the following overcoming many (and I mean MANY!) American Youth. Specifically that many have become;
1. Fat
2. Lazy
3. Stupid
4. Spoiled
We don't want that kind in The Corps. And yes, recruiting is just like the Stock Market, it has it's upswings and downswings... but overall, The Corps is doing just fine, thank you.
But if you want to know what kind of individual joins The Corps, click here
I will agree that there are several problems with America's youth, and a fundamental change in our culture in needed. Possibly that military service or such would have to become a greater part of daily life, as it is in some countries.
Nevertheless, I still feel that the military is just looking for excuses not to recruit people.
And out of my respect for you, I will refrain from commenting on the Marines.
Perun,
And that begs the question; why do you believe that the military is looking for excuses not to recruit?
And any comment you wish to make towards the Marine Corps is perfectly fine by me. Exchanges in thoughts and opinions are always fun to discuss.
I believe my article answers that question. The military is looking to blame factors other than themselves. Also the fact that a professional military is usually isolated from the public doesnt help.
As I stated in my previous post, there are plenty of conscript armies that have good quality soldiers, and that is largely because military service is part of every-day life. So every young male has to be prepared for eventual service.
I suggest you read Bacevich's book. It doesnt address this issue per se, but he does address the mentality that makes this situation possible. Namely the fact that the military wishes to see itself as a caste seperate from the rest of society, and the arrogance it often shows towards civilian society.
So again, in order to correct this problem, some fundamental changes need to be made in both military and civilian culture. Namely bringing the two closer together.
As for the Marines, I'll be brief. I dont have much regard for them as a fighting force and such. And the arrogance many of them have towards other military branches and other people in general is irritating at best.
I even remember my grandfather, who fought in the Philipines, used to talk about how the Marines would often try to start fights with soldiers and sailors only to get their butts kicked.
I believe my article answers that question. The military is looking to blame factors other than themselves. Also the fact that a professional military is usually isolated from the public doesnt help.
Actually, all your article did was point to a few malcontents with an axe to grind. I could pick and choose as well, tid-bits culled to defend an alternate position from yours
As I stated in my previous post, there are plenty of conscript armies that have good quality soldiers, and that is largely because military service is part of every-day life. So every young male has to be prepared for eventual service.
I won't argue with you there. But I ask, is there a need for a full time (professional) cadre? Of course.
I suggest you read Bacevich's book. It doesnt address this issue per se, but he does address the mentality that makes this situation possible. Namely the fact that the military wishes to see itself as a caste seperate from the rest of society, and the arrogance it often shows towards civilian society.
According to Bacevich. Reading a book by so-and-so is a sad substitute for actually being in the trenches, no pun intended.
So again, in order to correct this problem, some fundamental changes need to be made in both military and civilian culture. Namely bringing the two closer together.
Again, According to Bacevich.
As for the Marines, I'll be brief. I dont have much regard for them as a fighting force and such.
Are you serious? I'd like to point out the obvious; Nothing succeeds like success. Over 200 years of killing bad guys is all the proof the Corps needs to any given naysayer. Case in point... why are The Marines in Iraq right now? Occupation Duty is the Army's job. Essentially, the Army can't do it. Yet again, The Marines must bail out our Sister Service. But that's becoming habit (especially for the Army). As far as you not having much respect for the Marine Corps as a fighting force, I suggest you objectivly read some military history.
And the arrogance many of them have towards other military branches and other people in general is irritating at best.
And your point being? When you're the finest, it's hard to be humble. Not a boast... just stating a fact.
I even remember my grandfather, who fought in the Philipines, used to talk about how the Marines would often try to start fights with soldiers and sailors only to get their butts kicked.
...and may God bless your grandfather, but what else do you think he'd say? "We use to get our asses handed to us on a daily basis by Marines"
Perun, because your grandfather obviously didn't like Marines is no reason for you to lose your objectivity.
One thing I will tell you, I have had literally scores of soldiers, sailors and airmen tell me "I wish I joined The Corps", but I have never met a Marine that said they wished they joined a different Branch.
Perun,
To simplify matters, apart from your obvious distain for the Marine Corps from a personal perspective, could you cite some specifics from Marine Corps history to support your statement I dont have much regard for them as a fighting force and such.
I'm curious as to what massive blunders the Corps has done to rate such an... interesting accusation.
Thanks
Actually, all your article did was point to a few malcontents with an axe to grind.
Im sure you can agree that many of these restrictions are absolutely absurd, and as Fidei stated, "China" and other countries are not as picky.
More and more, America's defense is being put into the hands of private contractors(modern-day mercenaries, who make up as much as 1/10 of America's strength) and non-citizens. This is not good in the long-term for any nation.
The problem is both with civilian society(which is based on hedonistic values) and the military(which revels in isolating itself from the larger society).
I won't argue with you there. But I ask, is there a need for a full time (professional) cadre? Of course.
Im not against a mixed volunteer/conscript military. However, one should be on guard that the professional element doesnt become like the Prussian Junkers, who used such a system to maintain their power and influence over the rest of society.
According to Bacevich.
According to many people, including I should add America's founding fathers, who generally had contempt for standing armies.
Reading a book by so-and-so is a sad substitute for actually being in the trenches, no pun intended.
1) I myself was rejected for service because of a health condition. So my lack of trench experience is due to something out of my control.
2) Bacevich himself is a military veteran, and you can read his biography. Also, many of the conclusions Ive come to on this issues is supported by many others who also have military experience.
This is not really an issue of experience vs. non-experience of military service.
After all, many people who have no military experience whatsoever support your positions.
Again, According to Bacevich.
Bacevich is not alone. The notion that military service and civilian citizenship(society) should be closely related goes all the way back to Classical Greece and Rome. It was a mainstay of opinion during the Renaisance. And it was a key component of the thinking of our Founding Fathers.
And as had been argued throughout that time, by closely having the two together, there's often greater respect and love between the two.
On the other hand, with professional armies, civilian society often holds it in contempt. For example, the British had a saying of "a dog before a soldier". Civilians look upon soldiers as fools, not people to be respected.
This is true even post-9/11. Many of the people who scream "support the troops" often do so to cover up any guilt they have for not serving themselves, at best. At worse, they do so from a cynical attitude that the soldiers fight so they dont have to. I've seen this myself, and it is a very sad truth.
Are you serious? I'd like to point out the obvious; Nothing succeeds like success. Over 200 years of killing bad guys is all the proof the Corps needs to any given naysayer.
I wont deny that the Marine Corps is a fine fighting force, nor will I deny the sacrifices made by Marines(I even have family members who were and currently are serving with the Marines).
What I am contending with is the assertion that their sacrifices mean more than those made by other services.
As far as you not having much respect for the Marine Corps as a fighting force, I suggest you objectivly read some military history.
I have read much of military history, and what kind of foes have the Marines fought?
Barbary pirates were a bunch of sea-faring brigands. They fought a German army exhausted from four years of fighting in WW1. They never contended with the best of the Japanese army(which was stationed in Manchuria) during WW2, this while the Army in Europe had to battle against the Whermacht and even units of the Waffen-SS.
And so on. One canb question whether or not the Marines have really fought a first-rate opponent.
So I fail to see why the Marines are seen as being a better fighting force than the say the Army.
And your point being? When you're the finest, it's hard to be humble. Not a boast... just stating a fact.
It seems we differ on what it means to be "the best". Coming from both a Slavic and an Eastern Christian background, I cannot adhere to such a notion.
We Eastern Christians place great emphasis on the fact that God(the greatest of all beings) humbled himself to mingle among fallen humans, and preach salvation to them. He even defended a woman caught in adultery and stated "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". He also washed the feet of his disciples, a task often reserved for lowly servents.
The finest man who ever lived was also a paragon of humility. Any man with a true sense of honour follows his lead.
We Slavs have also taken to heart Christ's example of humility. Many Princes and Tsars sought to remain close to the concerns of their common subjects. Many of the greatest Slavic minds sought to mingle with common workers and peasents(Tolstoy being one example).
Even within a military context this mentality has been seen. The Zaporozhian Cossacks were as fine a military force as any could be. They were Ukraine's counter-part to the medieval knights. Yet their ethos was governed by a deep sense of Christian brotherhood among themselves and with the people as a whole. They did not see themselves as a caste seperate from the people but as the great champions of their cause; which is why they even fought against fellow Cossacks who sought to exploit the people.
Alexander Suvorov was the greatest Russian general of all time! He strictly upheld the distinctions of the ranks, but this did not prevent him from fraternizing with his soldiers(not least of which because he himself was a common soldier who rose through the ranks).
Within the Eastern Christian and Slavic world-view, being "the best" does not give you the right to be arrogant to others; rather you have the duty to be respectful towards those below you.
Perun, because your grandfather obviously didn't like Marines is no reason for you to lose your objectivity.
My grandfather is not the only person whose told me such things about the Marines. Many of my friends who did tours in Iraq tell me similar things.
In fact one even pointed me to this website, which says some not so nice things about the Marines.
In fact, in case you didnt know, the phrase "Tell it to the Marines" was originally used in a negative light. You can read more at the link. In fairness, it was originally directed towards the British marines, not the Americans.
Perun,
The vast majority of your response is simply a difference of opinion. You place great emphasis upon Bacevich, I look upon him as just another in a vast multitude. He's hardly The Burning Bush.
I have read much of military history, and what kind of foes have the Marines fought?
Barbary pirates were a bunch of sea-faring brigands. They fought a German army exhausted from four years of fighting in WW1. They never contended with the best of the Japanese army(which was stationed in Manchuria) during WW2, this while the Army in Europe had to battle against the Whermacht and even units of the Waffen-SS.
And so on. One canb question whether or not the Marines have really fought a first-rate opponent.
So I fail to see why the Marines are seen as being a better fighting force than the say the Army.
Here, I think you have lost objectivity.
The Barbary Pirates were the early 1800's version of Islamofascists. Even the Royal Houses of Europe were terrified of them. Then along came the Marines.
As far as the Germans in WWI are concerned, if they were so worn out, why were they on their way to Paris? The entire Allied Army (including the US Army) was in full retreat, AKA running away. A relativly small handfull of Marines turned the tide and saved the day. I recommend you read some of what Gen "Blackjack" Pershing, US Army, had to say about the Marines stopping the German Offensive in it's tracks.
You have completely overlooked the Banana Wars of the 1920's and 1930's. No Quarter given combat at it's worst. And where was the US Army? Nowhere in sight.
You charge that The Marines didn't fight the Japanese Army is simply historically wrong. Granted, there were many Naval Infantry troops that the Marines went up against, but you overlook the divisions upon divisions of Japanese Army troops that the Marines fought... and killed. By the way, the Waffen SS was only a small percentage of the overall German Armed Forces. And the Germans didn't fight to the death. You may also want to read some of the accounts of our allies in Western Europe during The War. The US Army had a reputation for (overall) being one of the least disciplined and worst led forces in the Theater of Operation... but thet sure did have lot's of equipment!
You forget Korea. MacAurther had 3 entire Army divisions when he went to Korea. They promptly disintergrated. Who pulled MacArthers ass out of the fire? The 1st Marine Provisional Brigade... all the way from Camp Pendleton, California. Also, why were there no Army troops at the Inchon Landing?
An din Viet-Nam. Who was responsible for the Northern Provinces? Of course... The Marines. The Army could barely handle Viet Cong insurgents. When it came to fighting a real foe (the North Viet-Namese) it was who that got called upon? You guessed it, The Marines.
The Gulf War. Who was designated to slug their way through both reinforced minefield-laden defensive positions? The 1st and 2d Marine Divisions. By the time the Army showed up, the Iraqis were already a defeated force. I should know. I was there.
Even in Iraq and Afghanistan present day. Why are the Marines there? Our job is to show up, kill people, leave. The Army pulls occupation duty. Anyhow, the Army simply can't hack it. That's the open secret in the Pentagon. Everyone in the Beltway knows it, though. Sad, really.
My grandfather is not the only person whose told me such things about the Marines. Many of my friends who did tours in Iraq tell me similar things.
I have to ask... have you spoken to any Marines?
And as far as that website is concerned... to be perfectly honest, that thing is laughable at best. Whoever put that thing together has a serious inferiority complex. Possibly one day that kid will stop pouting and face reality.
Also, I'm not sure if you've ever heard of Col David Hackworth. Before he passed away, he was the most decorated soldier alive. hereRead about what he had to sat concerning the differences between the Corps and the Army.
Here is a site containing quotes from a myriad of Army officers (mostly generals the likes of Patton, Pershing, Colin Powell, etc, etc). And yes, it's a pro-Marine website, but that's irrelevant. The quotes are contextually correct and historically accurate. Certainly more reputable than the drivel by that one child who put up his "I Hate Marines" site.
You know, Perun... I liken The Corps to Catholicism. In both cases I have weighed the pros and cons of opposing camps, and in all honesty... I have found the opposition to be wanting. They most certainly have their good points, but they simply just fall short.
If opne wants The One True Faith... become a Catholic. If one wants the true embodiment of the Warrior Ethos... become a Marine.
In closing, here is a quote from possibly the greatest Marine who ever lived, Lewis "Chesty" Puller. During the Korean War, an understrengthed 1st Marine Division was surrounded by eight fully strengthed communist Chinese divisions. The Marines fought their way out. This quote best epitomizes the entire "Marine vs Army" debate;
When an Army captain asked him for the direction of the line of retreat, Col Puller called his artillerymen, gave them the Army position, and ordered: "If they start to pull back from that line, even one foot, I want you to open fire on them." Turning to the captain, he replied "Does that answer your question?
We're here to fight."
Dominus Tecum, frate
The Caveman
MSgt USMC (ret)
The vast majority of your response is simply a difference of opinion.
Then I guess there's not much more either of us can say. You love the Marines, I dont.
btw, yes I am familiar with Hackworth and he agrees with me on many issues.
You love the Marines, I dont.
Here's the big difference... you have no love for The Corps based on 2d and 3d hand information. That's intellectual dishonesty.
I am familiar with Hackworth and he agrees with me on many issues.
And would those issues be how the good Colonel has very little use (or even respect) for the Army, and mucho admiration for my beloved Corps?
*evil grin firmly in place!*
Look Catholicam Speluncam Masculum, this discussion is over! I have lost what little patience I already had. Obviously this issue means more to you than it does to me.
And I do not consider listening to friends and family members "intellectual dishonesty".
Temper, temper!!
Listening to family and friends is all well and fine. In fact, it's admirable. But basing such to have such a deep seated distain for any organization is quite honestly... intellectually dishonest.
Well, like the old saying goes, the only people that really know Marines, are Marines themselves... and the enemy. Everyone else just has a second hand opinion.
In all honesty, I will say that I've answered and refuted many of your accusations with factual information. All you've been able to give in return is someone elses opinion and inaccurate history.
I thought we were having a good natured exchange. Seems I've struck a nerve. How sad.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home