Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft

[MG1968]

Rangel and Kerry were pretty specific, Spin.

 

[therealUT]

That's a stretch if you think that has to do with Rangel's statement. Joining the military and being accepted by an elite academy is two different things. Note where only a small fraction of those who apply even make it in. Hardly representive of the actual enlisted ranks where a majority of those who enlist go.

The figures posted are the actual statistics of the current plebe class at USMA. They are in the Army, considered Active Duty, and 75% or more of that class will end up spending time in Iraq.

Also, joining the military and being accepted by an elite academy, are one in the same. A cadet at USMA is sworn in on R Day (aka the first day they are at the Academy.)

If Rangel wanted to qualify his statement to only include the enlisted ranks, he had every opportunity to. However, I will post once more exactly what he said.

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.

I would state that every Officer in Iraq has plenty of civilian career options. I will also state that plenty of NCOs I have worked with have Bachelors degrees and Masters degrees.

At least Kerry could try to excuse his comments as a joke against the President. Rangel has no such excuse to hide behind. He might as well come out and say that our Army is full of rejects who cannot make it in the private sector.

 

[CSpindizzy]

So you are comparing the life paths and backgrounds of both an enlisted soldier and one who completes the USMA and saying they are the same?

Obviously one such as you who has repeatedly stated an elitist attitude towards enlisted and officers can afford to take such a flipped view. Considering comments such as Rangel's and others deal with the majority of those in the military - being non-officers either commissioned or not commissioned - I'd say they are closer to accurate than your own.

If you think those comments are off base, why did the military across the board have to lower standards and allow those that even Clinton Administration had a standard of not allowing in? Why did they have to up the incentives and bonuses? Why are they allowing those with very questionable backgrounds in? Sounds like the choice is to NOT go rushing off to Iraq.

 

[therealUT]

So you are comparing the life paths and backgrounds of both an enlisted soldier and one who completes the USMA and saying they are the same?

Obviously one such as you who has repeatedly stated an elitist attitude towards enlisted and officers can afford to take such a flipped view. Considering comments such as Rangel's and others deal with the majority of those in the military - being non-officers either commissioned or not commissioned - I'd say they are closer to accurate than your own.

If you think those comments are off base, why did the military across the board have to lower standards and allow those that even Clinton Administration had a standard of not allowing in? Why did they have to up the incentives and bonuses? Why are they allowing those with very questionable backgrounds in? Sounds like the choice is to NOT go rushing off to Iraq.

Lowered standards? In reference to tattoo's. I have yet to see any evidence that standards have been lowered with any respect to diploma requirements.

Also, my comments comparing enlisted to officers have dealt almost solely with their scope of operations and strategy. I have never stated that officers are of superior intelligence to enlisted. I will state that I would rather have an Officer commenting on grand strategy than an enlisted. As such, I would rather have a squad leader or platoon sergeant commenting on tactical procedures, rather than a four-star.

Finally, I am not comparing the life paths of joes to an Old Grad. However, Rangel's comments concern all military and all young men. He stated that he would bet his life that anyone with any other opportunities in life would not go to fight in Iraq. That is categorically untrue. If you want an example of joes that this is most untrue for, then take a look at the Tillman brothers. They certainly had the money to buy out their contracts if they did not want to fight in Afghanistan or Iraq.

I find it funny that you, as a former joe, actually defend Rangel's comments. I imagine you have read one too many O'Brien books. 'As the other men smoked joints and drank beer in the jungles of Vietnam, I wrote to my good friend and reminisced about the days of reading the poetry of Frost...'

Let me leave you with this: Since 2003, the military has actually enlisted more middle class white males with above national average academic scores, than they did prior to 2003. I guess being above average leaves little room for opportunity in the private sector???

 

[volinbham]

Since 2003, the military has actually enlisted more middle class white males with above national average academic scores, than they did prior to 2003. I guess being above average leaves little room for opportunity in the private sector???

Factor into this the growing economy and improving job market since that time. Clearly, those joining since 2003 where not lacking other opportunities. They had other motivations for joining - something which Rangel denied.

 

[lisafletcher]

whatever...
go democrats! thank God we have another chance at life and reality without the "american dream" of using the "family name" (Bush) to make millions and millions of dollars with our blood and sweat!

 

[volinbham]

whatever...
go democrats! thank God we have another chance at life and reality without the "american dream" of using the "family name" (Bush) to make millions and millions of dollars with our blood and sweat!

Umm, okay. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you.