Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by nononono
Thank you. Despite opinion from certain quarters that the military is comprised of failures or people just too poor and therefore stupid to git any good larnin' in 'em, it's not the case. And for the record, poor people do occasionally make something of themselves and are as capable of growing and developing intellectually as anyone else. Jesus. The military can and has offered exactly what the ads promise - growth, education and other skills - to its recruits. I don't care if Kerry meant it or not with his stupid "joke" (thumbs-up for the vetting process on that one...par for the course for that guy), it's telling that those who tend most to be anti-military-action are those who seem to assume that military are, by and large, poor, dumb idiots.

I was responding to a comment that most recruits have HS diplomas, with a reference to a three-day rant by Spanky about how bad our schools are. Not saying "all soldiers are dumb," or anything of that nature.

That said -- is it your view that America's best and brightest, people with college degrees and good job prospects, frequently choose to enlist in the military?

Note, also, that my other comments referred to "infantry" in "Iraq." By the first part of that, I meant to exclude those who sign up for West Point, ROTC, etc. The officer-training route is a very different route than the standard enlistee route. By the second part of that, I meant to infer that enlisting in the military becomes a lot less attractive when soldiers are getting killed and wounded daily, and this results in recruiting standards getting lower. This has been well reported in the context of the current war.

I do not believe "that the military is comprised of failures or people just too poor and therefore stupid to git any good larnin' in 'em." I do believe that enlisting in the military (again, not signing up for officer school, but enlisting), especially during wartime, tends to appeal to those who are poorer, less educated, and faced with fewer opportunities than, for example, the people on this board. If you find that offensive, I'm sorry. If you find it false, then I would suggest that you take a walk through a poor public high school and a rich private high school, and compare the number of military recruitment posters that you see.

How many people on this board have served as en enlistee in the US military? How many would have volunteered in wartime (and if so, what's stopping you now?) (Bilmore doesn't count -- they had a draft during the Civil War.)

[SlaveNoMore]

sebastian_dangerfield
You can lease a Range Rover Sport for $499 mo according to the Grey Lady.

Everybody's gotta have everything, and when they can't get it, they scream for the govt to fix things so they can, or make it so others' can't. That's what sits at the heart of most of the Philly Democrats I know - a beliefe everyone should get equal "stuff."

And no comment on the re line.

Depressing

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Do you think that the median voter (hi Spanky!) should vote GOP because the Dow hit 12,000?

You're implying here that the mean voter would. Indeed. Heh.*
















*ReynoldsPOTD

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by nononono
I am wondering how many people here, and otherwise opining in the press, etc., have had the experience of actually personally feeling the military protecting them, living with them, knowing exactly how smart they have to be to do a lot of what they do.

The first time i went to SF we didn't know where we should stay, and my wife and I stayed in a hotel in the Castro (I think). the rooms were all done up in themes- like walking to our room we walked by an open door to what looked like a prison cell.

Our room was done like a military barracks. We were there for like 4 days.

Does that count?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I would suggest that you take a walk through a poor public high school and a rich private high school,

we aren't allowed to anymore. Am I on ignore?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
blah blah blah it's all Clinton's fault blah blah blah bush is perfect blah blah blah 2700 dead soldiers don't count.

Thanks for answering the question. 'twas as expected.

This is just a paranthetical observation...

I was having drinks with staunch Republicans the other nite when Hillary came up. The resounding comment from no less than four of the seven assembled was "If only we could vote for her husband again." The best line was, "Can we elect her with him as VP, then assassinate her?"

I agree. I loved Bill, and would love to see another decent, sensible centrist in office again. No Republican with common sense bashes Bill Clinton. He was our greatest statesman. He singlehandedly destroyed liberalism and presided over a huge economic boom. So he did nothing on bin Laden. Is anyone really simpleminded enough to think killing bin Laden would have magically avoided what happened on 9/11? They want our hides, and there are hundreds of millions of them who hate us. Bill's failure to bomb their leader was not an all or nothing mistake, and its disingenuous to make such a silly accusation.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by nononono
I am wondering how many people here, and otherwise opining in the press, etc., have had the experience of actually personally feeling the military protecting them, living with them, knowing exactly how smart they have to be to do a lot of what they do.

I've known a whole lot of soldiers. Many very smart, some less so. Some tasks require a great degree of intelligence. Others do not -- the military includes a broad range of jobs. Others required a lot of intelligence but, unfortunately, the people in the jobs didn't have it (Lynddie England (sp?) and Charles Graner, anyone?)

It's good that you appreciate the military. More people should (and the police, firefighters, and paramedics.) But let's not pretend that enlisting in the military attracts a cross-section of America, or that it attracts as high a proportion of the higher socioeconomic classes as it does of the lower.

We put the lives of some of our least advantaged on the line in Iraq, men and women with fewer options and fewer alternatives than the people who chose to send them there. That's the tragedy.


NB: None of this is to defend Kerry, who is clearly an idiot and can't even begin to tell a joke (though, really -- did anyone think he could?)

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The first time i went to SF we didn't know where we should stay, and my wife and I stayed in a hotel in the Castro (I think). the rooms were all done up in themes- like walking to our room we walked by an open door to what looked like a prison cell.

Our room was done like a military barracks. We were there for like 4 days.

Does that count?

Speaking of the Castro, is everyone accounted for from SF? I have an APB e-mail out to my sister, but I haven't heard back from her yet. Do we know whether or not Less made it?

Usually my post-halloween-in-san-francisco-worries are related to whether or not someone got lucky in the Castro, not whether or not they got shot.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Bill's failure to bomb their leader was not an all or nothing mistake, and its disingenuous to make such a silly accusation.

he did bomb him, or missiled him. in the middle of the country he was allowed to control, which provided a logistic base for training and organizing 9/11 and many more attacks.

you should be careful how you use the word silly.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I was responding to a comment that most recruits have HS diplomas, with a reference to a three-day rant by Spanky about how bad our schools are. Not saying "all soldiers are dumb," or anything of that nature.

That said -- is it your view that America's best and brightest, people with college degrees and good job prospects, frequently choose to enlist in the military?

Note, also, that my other comments referred to "infantry" in "Iraq." By the first part of that, I meant to exclude those who sign up for West Point, ROTC, etc. The officer-training route is a very different route than the standard enlistee route. By the second part of that, I meant to infer that enlisting in the military becomes a lot less attractive when soldiers are getting killed and wounded daily, and this results in recruiting standards getting lower. This has been well reported in the context of the current war.

I do not believe "that the military is comprised of failures or people just too poor and therefore stupid to git any good larnin' in 'em." I do believe that enlisting in the military (again, not signing up for officer school, but enlisting), especially during wartime, tends to appeal to those who are poorer, less educated, and faced with fewer opportunities than, for example, the people on this board. If you find that offensive, I'm sorry. If you find it false, then I would suggest that you take a walk through a poor public high school and a rich private high school, and compare the number of military recruitment posters that you see.

How many people on this board have served as en enlistee in the US military? How many would have volunteered in wartime (and if so, what's stopping you now?) (Bilmore doesn't count -- they had a draft during the Civil War.)

I have it on good authority that it is possible to grow up dirt-poor, wander into a recruiting office thinking Navy and no awareness even of the possibility to aspire to anything other than base-level employment, and come out identified as an OTS candidate in the Air Force and go on to a long and fairly illustrious career in the military.

What is so wrong, so off-putting about people who have some level of formal education below what you tend to value? People with less education or even no aptitude or interest for it can still be smart. You probably don't need your car mechanic to have Harvard Class of '74 hanging on the wall to the garage, but you sure as hell want him to be smart about what that strange noise in your engine is. And I'm not sure why it's a horrible thing that that guy is doing that vs. drafting briefs, or why that would lead to an assessment that mechanics are deplorably stupid.

I didn't enlist in the military, but I'm quite familiar with the existence and experience of it. And fwiw, I know some highly educated folks sitting in Iraq at this very moment.

But just a comment on your argument - you want to argue that the lowest-level recruits are relatively uneducated. How do they compare to the lowest-level recruits at McDonald's or Walmart?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by nononono
I am wondering how many people here, and otherwise opining in the press, etc., have had the experience of actually personally feeling the military protecting them, living with them, knowing exactly how smart they have to be to do a lot of what they do.

This is a board for lawyers -- so darn few. Same for journalists, and really for any profession requiring advanced degrees.

Also with a volunteer, professional military which is much smaller than during the Cold War, Americans in general are becoming more and more divorced from their military, or from an understanding of what they do. Just a fact of life.

S_A_M

[nononono]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I've known a whole lot of soldiers. Many very smart, some less so. Some tasks require a great degree of intelligence. Others do not -- the military includes a broad range of jobs. Others required a lot of intelligence but, unfortunately, the people in the jobs didn't have it (Lynddie England (sp?) and Charles Graner, anyone?)

It's good that you appreciate the military. More people should (and the police, firefighters, and paramedics.) But let's not pretend that enlisting in the military attracts a cross-section of America, or that it attracts as high a proportion of the higher socioeconomic classes as it does of the lower.

We put the lives of some of our least advantaged on the line in Iraq, men and women with fewer options and fewer alternatives than the people who chose to send them there. That's the tragedy.


NB: None of this is to defend Kerry, who is clearly an idiot and can't even begin to tell a joke (though, really -- did anyone think he could?)

So, you've know some soldiers who were smart, and some less so? And this differs from civilians you have met how?

I never suggested the highest socioeconomic ranks enter the military by the same proportion as they enter Wharton. But to act as though "having" to enter the military (whether for lack of imagination, shitty grades, needing to get kicked into shape, or merely for desire) is somehow a tragedy or a shame is just an insult to the people serving. It's an honorable profession (and please - you can find Graner and England in chinos on any college campus), and just because not everyone heads into it knowing exactly what they are or what they want, for whatever reason, doesn't mean they are being exploited. I am not sure how to explain how condescending "We put the lives of our least advantaged on the line in Iraq" is to say, but I can guarantee you that those serving probably don't appreciate it much. The mere fact of growing up poor (or "disadvantaged socioeconomically," if you must) does not render one incapable of making mature decisions. The military offers the potential for raising up, and they look for people ready to do that.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by nononono
So, you've know some soldiers who were smart, and some less so? And this differs from civilians you have met how?

I never suggested the highest socioeconomic ranks enter the military by the same proportion as they enter Wharton. But to act as though "having" to enter the military (whether for lack of imagination, shitty grades, needing to get kicked into shape, or merely for desire) is somehow a tragedy or a shame is just an insult to the people serving.

It also ignores both training and promotion. While the relatives are distant, and I concede neither are particularly smart (either book- or common-sense-), they have both gone through extensive training to do what they are capable of doing, and to do it well. And they have been promoted accordingly. While no portion of government is a pure meritocracy, I have at least some faith that when given choices over whom to promote in rank, and when, the cream rises to the top. It may be light cream, or even half-and-half, but it's also not skim milk.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
This is a board for lawyers -- so darn few. Same for journalists, and really for any profession requiring advanced degrees.

Also with a volunteer, professional military which is much smaller than during the Cold War, Americans in general are becoming more and more divorced from their military, or from an understanding of what they do. Just a fact of life.

S_A_M

Huh? What does being lawyers have to do with anything? I was talking with a lawyer yesterday whose husband (also a lawyer) is in Iraq right now. My college roommate (she of the multiple advanced degrees) is married to a high-level DOJ guy who's over there on a 2-year tour. And plenty of lawyers grew up in military families. It's not as though touching the military makes you incapable of experiencing the professional ranks, geez.

That said, I would agree that Americans are generally divorced from and clueless about and unfortunately perhaps unappreciative about what the military is and does, despite the yellow ribbons and the howling of the press. I get the sense sort of of a "those people" phenomenon, though at the moment I live in a place without any real military presence, which has not always been the case.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
How many people on this board have served as en enlistee in the US military? How many would have volunteered in wartime (and if so, what's stopping you now?)

I don't know if you're taking a poll, but

I volunteered and served in war time, though not as an enlistee. (There certainly is a big difference.)

I am not doing it again, because: (a) I feel as though I did my part; (b) I am now married with small children; (c) I am a bit too old to do most of the fun stuff; and (d) I think our civilian leaders are fools.

S_A_M