Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

“If the little crack becomes a chasm we are all in trouble.”

“If.”

If?

I’m from Omaha. On the southeast side of town we have Offut AFB, on the west we have the more affluent citizens. The two sides do not intermingle. 95% of Omaha’s military presence does not leave the Bellevue-South Omaha area. Ask a student of a Millard high school (on the west end of Omaha) about pride in America’s military, and you will get a blank stare.

Already there is a significant demographic difference between the military and civilian populations -and it is even worse in elite institutions. If the little crack becomes a chasm we are all in trouble.

A nice train of thought worth givin some time and thought to. Thanks this may help keep me off reeds back and him off mine for a little while

Lets look at some numbers, not real numbers just some that I make up to suit my needs. Each year it taks X amount of our young to keep the military in shape, we have been around for a few hundered years or so. Thats one heck of a lot of military people to not have taken over by now. Cloud it be that our military was not that good or the generials so grate. No we have the best military and it’s leadership is devine and pure of heart. Which is good because those of the military in the fighting ranks, where the dirty little jobs get done (as in Get R Done). Well that is the true heart and soul of our fighting force, they fight because they know what the oath means. Its not to some generial, president or political party. Its between them and there country. The military teaches much more than the art of the kill. It’s not just made up of Republicans and Democrats, its made up of all of us. That and its true, America is a very Lucky Place to Be.

“If the little crack becomes a chasm we are all in trouble.”

Lol, like brutalnaivety said, “if?” That chasm is already the size of the Grand Canyon, and you think it’s a crack? May I suggest trifocals?

Paw Paw,

“That and its true, America is a very Lucky Place to Be.”

I agree.

“we have the best military and it’s leadership is devine and pure of heart.”

I disagree. Leaders are men and women, and it is only once in a very very rare while that either a man or woman is indeed “pure of heart” and in a powerful leadership role at the same time. I think you have too much faith in the good intentions of others, but maybe not, who’s to say?

I would be very interested to hear those reasons for those people for not wanting the military on campus. Before they gave their reasons, I would only ask where they thought they would be teaching if it weren’t for the military they seek to ban from campus.
My son is about to graduate and for the last four years he has been in the ROTC program. The program he has been involved in is an excellent one. For those cadets who apply themselves there is no end to how far their training will take them.
I asked my son why the army, what do they have that you need. He knew he could attend a university of his choice and not have to rely on them for money for his education. His response made me proud. He told me he wanted to make difference and give back to his country. My son is a patriot, he is proud of his country, he is a man. Quit honestly I wouldn’t give you a tinkers damn about the fools who share the opinion of the administrator who tries to ban the military from campus. My son and men like him are willing to give everything to defend our country and the rights we have been given, even the rights the educators abuse.

Well, nice oratory there jc, the only problem with your argument is the assumption that those who choose not to have the military on campus are not also loving of this country and willing to defend it with their life if need be. Which implies you do not understand at all why they don’t want the military on their campus.

I will give you a perspective that is very likely shared by those who don’t, at this time, want the military on their campus.

I served in the Army 72-75. I enlisted even though I was opposed to the war in Viet Nam. But I have a 14 year old daughter now who wants to join ROTC in high school. Her mother and I have refused her request. Can you even begin to guess why? It is not because we don’t believe in serving in the military, and we certainly love America’s Constitution and the enormous number of benefits that the luck of being born here has conferred upon us.

It is because there is an enormous difference in the philosophy that directs our military activity today from much of the rest of our nation’s history. We were brought up to believe that America does not believe in war except as a last resort and in self-defense. We were brought up to believe that it is a violation of office to spend American military lives unnecessarily.

After Viet Nam, I thought America had learned a valuable lesson. Specifically, to never undertake a military engagement unless it is essential to the defense of our borders and people, and to never again enter a conflict without both the will and committment of the American population fully behind the act to engage, win, and get out. Failure to observe these lessons and policy will lead to the wasting of American military lives, which could include my daughter in just a couple years.

Our President Bush has utterly failed the test of those lessons. He has in fact, wasted many hundreds of American military lives by rushing into a conflict without sound intelligence, without full preparation for our troops and their safety, and without a plan to engage, win, and get out with the fewest American casualties.

So, no. As long as our government is willing pursue this abject ignorance of bloody lessons learned and paid for with American lives in Viet Nam, we will not permit our daughter to prepare to support such a leader or their policies which spend American blood like monopoly money in a board game.

America can only hope that her leader’s actions and words will speak the same. It is an act of faith when electing those leaders. But, when someone like GW Bush is elected and professes his love for the military lives of Americans in word only, while taking actions which are utterly wasteful of their lives and limbs; then as a patriot and a person who loves this country and what it stands for, I must oppose such leader’s actions and do my best to insure that my children see the hypocrisy and wastefulness of such leadership, which by deed, shows no respect for those who serve at all. And it is my duty as a parent to insure my daughter’s life is not wasted by leaders such as these.

I am pleased to see that so many Americans have the same sense of patriotism and duty as parents as I evidence by the desperate measures our military is having to take to try to keep our modern volunteer military recruited. More and more parents agree they don’t want their child’s life or limbs wasted in Iraq. The goal was to remove Saddam Hussein, that was accomplished. Not another American life should have been spent after that, and each one that was, was wasted. Every American life and limb lost after Hussein’s capture has been for other reasons having nothing to do with the protection and defense of American borders and her people.

This whine about “Elite Universities” is pathetic. The cold Truth is that the ENTIRE civilian establishment is isolated from the Military Community and their Families.

Jonah Goldberg is a perfect example. Jonah is the Founder of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, a “Support the Troops. Support the War.” Group. For all his Yellow Ribboned SUV and fancy talk, he refuses to volunteer or let his children near the Army. This is what the vast majority of them are like, “I already wear the Ribbon. Leave me the Fuck alone.”

The anti-war protests in Vietnam really started after the Draft. Until the Draft happens, every Spread Freedom Lover is going to wave the Flag and watch somebody else die.

Hey. At least they are moral…

Aldous
Your case could have been stated without the “F” word.
There are many reasons for one to have an opinion about Bush, the Iraq war, a particular columnist, the men fighting the war, etc.
My attitude is that as long as an honest approach to determining your position is used, then for you it is the right thing. That makes us all right and nobody wrong. When it comes to history and how our future writers of that history, we will have to examine all the things that are not on the table for us to see. Correspondence, plans, diplomacy, leadership all play a part in those archives to be written. I most of the disagree with David R. Remer, but he also uses cogent arguments for his position. That makes him right. I would use a different set of resources, research, etc., to come to my conclusion. And that would make it right for me.
In closing, David, stick to your guns on daughter in the military. It is not a very good choice for most females and their career path choice.

tom said: “In closing, David, stick to your guns on daughter in the military. It is not a very good choice for most females and their career path choice.”

Tell that to our maimed GI’s being ministered by the brave, courageous, and caring female medical personnel in Iraq, tom.

tom, you are of course right, and I agree, that when it comes to political debate, opposing views can both be justified. Actually, it is relatively easy to understand as well, since two sides often have different priorities within a common set of mutually held goals.

I think the Military needs more of a liberal influence in it, and Liberals need to be more willing to to consider the military sides of matters. Diplomacy needs the willingness to respond seriously to those who choose going toe to toe with us over peaceful solution. We also need the influence to counter the dangerously one-sided political hold the right-wing has on the military imagination.

If this is to be a military of the people, it has to represent all our points of view, not merely the most conservatives.

And please, don’t hand me that “liberals as traitors” B.S. We’re patriotic citizens like everybody else. We just got to get over the inhibitions Vietnam put on us. We got really screwed over that time, the way Republicans are getting screwed over now. Neither side of the political fence can pick the right wars or right war presidents every time, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do so when its necessary.

I am not selling the liberals as traitors BS. What I am saying is we might have liberals as fools.

Our founding fathers knew about the dangers of a standing army because they had experienced it. A country has to protect itself and the U.S. has a lot to protect. But an army is inherently dangerous. That is why we work so hard to keep civilian control.

Now ask yourself how human systems work. We make up rules and we try to work for the common good. Why do the rules work? Many countries in the world have had wonderful rules and constitutions that led to nothing but misery. Rules work only to the extent that those who can enforce them believe in them.

We are looking at a situation that we have never faced in the U.S. before. We could have a military that is both very large and estranged from the much of the rest of the society. In the past we have had military that was more or less estranged from society (in the late 19th Century) but it was very small. And we have had large militaries (such as in WWII) but it was well integrated.

Despite all the rhetoric, the liberal elite believes that a military power grab is impossible in America. Don’t listen to what they say. Look at what they do. If they considered the military an independent power base, they would work harder to engage it and to make sure their sons and daughters got positions of authority in it. I agree with them.

In the short or medium term, there is no danger from our armed forces. But as a society you can’t let your fighting be done exclusively by others. Even in America this can be dangerous. What happens when a future Truman tries to relieve a future Macarthur and he decides not to go? And his troops support him because they feel little connection to the civilian authority?

When the brahmins are involved with the warriors it is not out of charity, but rather self interest. We have lived so long with stability in the U.S. that we now think it is the inevitable state of nature. In fact such a happy state of affairs is very uncommon indeed. It is rarely achieved and almost never maintained for such a long time.

Actually, that comment wasn’t directed at you, Jack. It was meant to balance the admission that liberals don’t sign up as much with an admonition to some of the redder of the red column to give us a break on the question of our love of this country.

Unfortunately, I let those two paragraphs run together and gave the impression that I felt you believed that, which I knew then and know now not to be the case.

I agree with your analysis. The last thing we need is a military that doesn’t hold the interests of all Americans and not just the right-wing worthy of protection.

David R Remer
Just got out of bed this morning, finished breakfast and newspaper, read this posting.
Reference women in military. I recognize the contributions women make in the military, not just in the medical area but other strategic areas. But for women to be on the front lines? If that is what a woman wants, then so be it. After all she has a “choice” in child bearing, so let her have a choice in careers. I personally feel that it is not a good area for women to be for many reasons.

Jack,

Your article raises many questions that are hard to anwser with anything but opinion as to why the more liberal schools dont want the military on campus, so I’ll offer another…..

I think that our military is made up of quite a cross-section of american youths. Few of them really have any ties to politics or party at 18-20.
Most, (not all), will agree that when the military ballots in an election come in, they lean more Rep. by a wide margin.

Could it be that the disipline, hard work, and duty to country they learn in the military causes them to vote more to the right?

If that is true, I wonder if THAT is what the liberals fear most?

I see the libral influences in our military and our every day life. Before Viet Nam, there was some comon sense in our government. When we went to war it was to win.
When we turned the dogs of war loose we did not neuter them and cut a foot off and muzzle them.

The libral idea that you can talk your way out of any problem is bordering on the insane.
And has been proven wrong so many times in the past,
a few examples,Korea, Viet Nam, Iran, Iraq, Africa
If you are unable or unwilling to back up what you are trying to say or accomplish talk is usless.

Libral concepts have changed the face of our legal system to the point that criminals RIGHTS are more important than the victom, It is so bad that in major metro areas they canot get enough people
to become officers, because they are not allowed to protect themself and if they do they are prosecuted and or fired

The reason left-right, liberal-conservative, etc arguments are so self defeatiing is that todays republican is the yesteryears democrat. The point I’m trying to make is that whatever the political leanings of one individual is hardly makes any difference. The first Bush should have finished business in IRAQ period. He didn’t. He was supposed to represent conservative republicans. He messed it up. William Jefferson Clinton didn’t take UBL when he had a golded opportunity. He messed it up. He was supposed to represent liberal democrats. So the label really doesn’t make any difference. National leaders in the administration and congress are going to continually mess it up whatever their political leanings are. That is mankind. The answer to the situation is as vigilant citizens of this great country stay alert and support candidates that speak your language. We can all only hope that those choices we make at the ballot box don’t turn into a bullet box.

There have been Americans who have disagreed with every conflict the military has ever became involved in. Nobody wants to see their child go to war. There is however a huge leap from being involved in the JROTC Program at the local high school and joining the military. David, from your comments, I doubt you have any experience with the JROTC program. I suggest you read the mission of the program to see what they have to offer before you chastise the program. The program teaches cadets skills that will serve them throughout life regardless of their decision on military service.
You may agree or disagree with the policies of the governmeat at any given time in history, however I suspect you would have a problem with the policies of any Republican president elected. I may be mistaken, but you seem to rave a bit about our president. If what you say is true then we will obviuously have a major shift in policy after the next presidential election. Meanwhile, my son, and others like him will defend your freedom, regardless if they agree with the current administration or not.
I was talking with a former friend who was asking me about my sons activities in the army. His questions were directed to the benifits for education. I told him what some of the programs that are currently available. He remarked how great the benifits sounded, and continued asking questions. He finally made a comment that the programs sounded very good, BUT he didn’t want HIS son joining because of all the fighting going on. He didn’t express an opinion on the war. He said nothing of his support of nor opposition of the policies. He didn’t want HIS son getting involved. I then commented I was glad everyone didn’t see things the same way, and had it not been for Americans joining the military when there was “Fighting going on”, we wouldn’t be enjoying our country today. I haven’t heard from him since. Can’t say I miss him.

JC, I can’t help but comment on your prejudgements. There are soldiers in Iraq going AWOL in growing numbers. I can tell you now, they are not all liberals. I know that from psychology and sociology, the areas in which I was educated in college. There are some idealogical differences between those on the right and the left, but, human fears, weaknesses, strengths, etc. follow a bell curve for society. The notion that conservatives are somehow genetically superior is just that, a fanciful notion.

I am on record as having supported a run for president by Jack Kemp or John McCain. I left the Democratic party years ago recognizing the candidate is more important for my vote than his/her party. So your guess that I would oppose any Republican president is wrong. Being a fiscal conservative, it is damned hard to find a decent candidate in either party these days willing to run, and no, Bush is no fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination. The facts are plain as day on that issue. And I am also on record here as not having voted for John Kerry. My candidate was Nader.

A number of my buddies in the military were liberals during the Viet Nam war. Many of them enlisted. Most of them too opposed the war in Viet Nam but served nonetheless. I have seen articles about polls showing the military is made up of a majority of conservatives. During Viet Nam, the bulk of the grunts were Democrats - of course most of them were drafted, then.

But, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that most liberals in this country do in fact support our troops and want them to succeed and come home safe regardless of their political affiliation. I would also guess that more liberals would not want their children to serve in Iraq, than conservatives, but, probably not by too much. No parent wants to lose a child, and liberals don’t see Iraq as a worthy cause justifying the deaths and maiming of their children. Afghanistan and 9/11 saw a large number of enlistees from both sides. When America is threatened, there is no lack of those from both sides willing to take on our defense.

And that pretty much says it all. When our nation is in danger, recruits will come from both sides of the aisle. But, when war is elective and not based on direct imminent threat against the US, then whichever party is in power is going to lose recruit support from the opposing party.

JC, as for the JROTC, I have read the material. And yes, it is a similar brainwashing group think program as I experienced and laughed at in Basic Training. But, then, I was 22 when I enlisted. I am not about to subject my 15 year old daugther to such brainwashing groupthink. When she is a few years older, she will be able to analyze what is one sided brainwashing and what is factual and balanced.

Patriotism in this society exists in two forms. Blind and Critical. Blind patriotism refuses reality and facts and data which have any tint of negative reflection attached to them. Critical patriotism recognizes our greatness and weaknesses and demands that we do and be even better where we can.

brutlnaivety,
I was staioned at Offut for a while while I was in service. Maybe the reason the GIs don’t very often leave the Bellevue-South area is because that’s the only place in that God forsaken town that they feel welcomed.

I was proud to serve in the SAR while in the Air Force and proud to serve in Vietnam (even though to this day I don’t know why we were there).I am also a very proud father of a career Air Force Sergeant.
Given that I guess that I might come off as a Ahole but if you don’t like the military and can’t respect those who served in it, then you aint worth the trouble it would take to defend you.

However those on the military will do just that.

As usual (in my opinion anyway), David has made the most salient points here.
It is hard to get people willing to join the military if they don’t trust that their government is going to make the decision to send them to fight when it is actually necessary.

I am from a very liberal family of which most of the males (who are neither fools, nor are they stupid) either voluntarily joined the military, or were drafted during the Vietnam years — but since that time, none of our family members have been encouraged to join, and only a very few were personally motivated to enlist.
Quite obviously to the men in my family, enlisting in our military was tied to their sense of American patriotism, but also, has been intrinsically linked to a question of trust in our government.
Perhaps the simple truth is, the liberal mentality that has developed in the years since Vietnam is overwhelmingly comprised of people who are not so blindly trusting that America’s leaders will only ask them to risk their lives for a very good reason?
I have the distinct feeling that our current war in Iraq can only reinforce this kind of collective mistrust in the minds of those who stand on the left of the political spectrum.

As for whether or not our military will ever be run by a bunch of fools, I don’t think that’s very likely. After all, a person cannot reach the highest ranks lacking basic intelligence.

David R
You have not spent time trying to see what the JROTC program is designed to do. If you had really tried to learn what they teach you could not draw the conclusion you did. No matter how eloquent you are in voicing your opinion, the fact remains you have a “Let someone else do it, not my kid” attitude. I thank you for your service to our country, we owe you that. My son will continue to defend our country and your right to express your opinion no matter how misguided it is. You are a victim of the very thing you accuse the military of, brainwashing groupthink.
Ron Brown
Thank you also gor your service and that of your son. Weren’t you in my “Brainwas/ Groupthink Class” in college?

A bigger point to ponder is…are these privately owned campuses or federally funded institutions? If they are the latter it is not their choice but the choice of the American voters! I would be interested to see an itinerary from these so called “protective” campuses to see what other groups are coming and spreading their messages on their(our) property!

Beagle-
It could be a number of things. You have the selection effect that the Vietnam War had on Liberal participation in the army, so you may be getting that proportion of conservative leaning fellows coming in, and therefore coming out. Making it a matter of virtue, while flattering to the influence of the armed forces, may just be your side reading in the desired interpretation. That’s not to say there is no influence, I just don’t think it’s that cut and dried. After all, John Kerry when through more military training and combat experience than Bush did. As for discipline, hard work and duty to country, I do not think those to be exclusively conservative values.

Montie-
You see liberal scapegoats all around you, that’s what. It means all you have to do is oppose liberals, and this country’s lot will improve. That won’t happen. Your side is in charge now, and they are doing no better.

It’s politics, short-sighted as ever, people too concentrated on winning the next election to take care of the practical realities, and too sold on the notion of simplistic platforms to take the initiative on policy.

JC-
I think David knows what its intended to do: get students interested in a career in the army. David wants his children to have the choice to serve, but to make that choice as informed adults, rather than suggestible teenagers. He is not witholding his children from combat.

But that other fellow? I think you spoke ill of him wrongly. You agree with Bush’s policy, so you don’t quite take the POV we do, so let me put it this way: Do you trust the civilian leaders of this military with your life?

Do you trust the Pentagon planners who never planned for the contingency of an insurrection? Do you trust the White House and Pentagon officials who took us into a war, the deadliest in thirty-five years, on a case for war that has fallen apart in just about ever respect?

If one cannot trust the elected and appointed officials of this country to wage our wars right, why should we voluntarily trust them with our lives? To get us into the war effort, they have to do one of two things. First, reform their efforts and make us believe it, or second, draft us, and take the consequences of bringing back that hated institution. Otherwise, they lack the power to make us put ourselves in harms way for their highly flawed agenda.

Traci,
My experience is entirely federally funded institutions. While the universities have no problem taking government money, many do everything they can do to make life difficult for recruiters. The military offers opportunities for young people just as large and small companies. Rarely are those companies faced with the same difficulties being on campus.
This didn’t start with the election of President Bush, and didn’t start with the World Trade Towers. I still can’t figure out when and where the time is right to stant up to tyranny.

One of the problems in allowing the military on campus, whether middle school, high school, or university, is the inherent conflict that many school non-discrimination policies have with the military policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell”. I am speaking specifically here of the class action suit brought by several law schools against the Federal government. Of course, the counter argument is that if you don’t want the military, don’t accept federal funds. This is workable with large schools that have adequate funding, such as Harvard, but what about small district public schools that depend on federal funding just to meet basic education needs? Should they create exceptions to their non-discrimination polices merely to allow JROTC and receive federal funding? I really don’t know the answer.

This seems like a rather silly argument… Why would anyone be opposed to military recruiters being in schools? They never got in my way when they were at my school and I can only assume that things haven’t changed since then. It’s rather like being opposed to Christmas trees in a shopping mall.

JC~
It is just absurd!! I know of many campuses that allow guest speakers to come and spew their anti-war rhetoric, which I have no problem with as long as they are giving the opposition the same respect, but they don’t!! Are we afraid to let our young adults get the full spectrum?

Re liberal speakers. Sometimes all it takes is a simple question. Last year I sat through a long story about how the Iraqi civilians fear and dislike the American military. The woman telling it related an incident where an American armored vehicle pulled up at a local stand that sold chicken. With weapons bristling, the GI came out and bought a roasted chicken from the vendor. The woman asked rhetorically, “what could that vendor have been thinking?” I raised my hand and told her he was probably thinking, “Gee, I am surprised these armed men paid that much for the chicken.”

Everyone laughed and it broke her momentum. The best way to counter the politically correct is with humor. They thrive on vitriol, but they can’t stand being made fun of. Seriously, without realizing it, she had illustrated a fundamental fact about the U.S. military. It is not the hell on wheels oppressor its critic like to paint. I don’t think anyone made any money off the Red Army as it marched into Germany, or from Saddam’s when he invade Kuwait.

I spent last year at a relatively liberal university grad program, but one that takes a lot of military officers in their mid-level training (captains & majors). The military guys always did their homework and were leaders of the seminar discussions. So much so that on occasion professors had to stop the discussion and “set the record straight”. The liberal professoriate has gotten a little intellectually flabby and I think the presence of smart officers makes them a little uncomfortable.

Paw Paw,

Its not to some generial, president or political party. Its between them and there country. The military teaches much more than the art of the kill. It’s not just made up of Republicans and Democrats, its made up of all of us.

This is a sentiment I can truly agree with. Well said. I didn’t serve myself although I got real close in 1990 before the 1st Iraq war. I have nothing but admiration for our troops.

Nothing personal in the posts but I get a little spirited when a nerve is touched.

Jack-
Humor can break through tension. I just wonder if the old lady really felt as you said. Did she feel relief that the soldiers were gone? Or a tiny bit of regret? Or maybe she felt fear, as her selling the chicken might mark her. The question is, who asked her? Maybe the woman whose momentum you interrupted.

If we simply assume our image is positive, we might be glossing over some real problems.

Jack: “So much so that on occasion professors had to stop the discussion and “set the record straight”. The liberal professoriate has gotten a little intellectually flabby and I think the presence of smart officers makes them a little uncomfortable.”

Jack, I suspect they make each other equally uncomfortable. The military is not prone to full disclosure and balanced historical views. Of course, there are liberal profs with the same disposition. Having experienced both sides, both have perspectives that uncomfortably round out the other’s complete picture. The military, just on the basis of efficient management of resources and planning, must keep data on AWOL’s, desertions, Article 15’s, etc., but would never willingly divulge that information to the public whom they wish to recruit. On the other hand, some liberal prof’s are a bit scant on the perceived global communist threat of the 50’s and 60’s as justification for the escalating involvement in Viet Nam, for example.

BTW, does anyone really believe our military has not been keeping a body count of Iraqi’s in Iraq. I find that very hard to believe. Our military prides itself on efficiency of action, yet, how can they possibly project future outcomes without accurate data from current and past engagements? They can’t.

I don’t know, but if the lecturer had actually asked her she could have easily squared me. That she didn’t indicates that she also did not know.

As a person who lectures myself, I take kind of a Darwinian perspective. Any lecturer who can’t put down a polite (if wise ass) audience member is too weak to lecture or selling a bill of goods that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Jack,

“Any lecturer who can’t put down a polite (if wise ass) audience member is too weak to lecture or selling a bill of goods that doesn?t stand up to scrutiny.”

Of course, if you’re Bush, you’ll be smart and prevent these people from asking questions to start with :)

Traci,
You have hit the nail on the head from my point of view. I had no idea how warped the view was until I became involved with our local high school my son attended. The instructor is one of the finest men I have ever met and contrary to popular belief rather that to serve as an assistant for the local recruiter, he has discouraged joining the military in favor of continuing education as a civilian. That is not his stand with every cadet because obviously every student is different.
Again, before you chastise the JROTC for being a recruiting agent for the military, I suggest people read what their mission is and then speaking directly to the local instructor who runs the program. The vast majority of cadets at the school my son attended did not join the military. If the program is designed to recruit cadets for the military, they’re doing a terrible job. Obviously, the option is there for the cadets if they choose to take it. I wasn’t aware it was immoral for the military to expose students to the military.
Stephen,
It has been my objective to teach my sons to think on their own and grow to be responsible, moral, productive adults. As much as some dislike programs like the JROTC, from my observation they do exactly that. If students aren’t exposed to various views and experiences how do they grow? Yes, it is our responsibility as parents to influence our children as best we can to do the right thing, but we owe it to them to let them see opposing views. The military wasn’t my personal choice for my son, it was his. I exposed my son to many different opportunities and HE picked the career he wanted. Now I owe it to him to support him and help him in any way I can. I could have told him I didn’t want him involved in JROTC and he may or may not have wanted to follow my wishes. He probably would have done as I asked, but I know he would have wondered why my departure from equal exposure to opportunities.
It is my opinion that we should prepare children to make good decisions based on gathering all the information available to them, not just that I agree with. Pass on your experience from a lifetime and council them the best we can, but allow them the opportinity to control their lives as best they can. Do children suddenly become worldly and knowledgable when they turn eighteen or graduate from high school? Our country today is full of children who at graduation have no idea of what they want to do in life. They’re are children well into their twenties still living with mom and dad with no idea what they want to do. Some of this may be from parents not exposing their children to the possibilities available to them. This I believe includes the possibility of serving their country in the armed forces. I am slanted I guess but I would much rather my son enlist and serve his country than stay at home with too much time on his hands like so many recent graduates I see.
I don’t agree with everything the politicians do, nor the direction my country takes sometimes. I don’t agree with everything President Bush does nor any other president in history. However, the thought that maybe we can inlist and support just the things we agree with, or the president we like is absurd. The way to change that I disagree with is at the ballot box.
I agree, we are in a terrible mess in Iraq, my personal feelings are we should have left them continue to murder each other as they have for thousands of years. I don’t think the Iraqi people are able to govern themselves without a religious nut to tell them what to think. I don’t see a country full of free thinkers. These are the people who riot because someone may or may not have flushed a book! Sorry, my opinion, they’re all nuts. I also believe there should be accountability for Newsweek. They are guilty of publishing something they had no idea was accurate. Sorry for the ramble.

What a wonderful quote from Butler. The Romans said it even better: Si vis pacem para bellum. If your goal is peace, prepare for war. We already have an entrenched class of psuedointellectuals in this country who think that the military is evil and that military people are stupid robots. Universal conscription would eliminate that.

My own experience: I served in the US Army for only a short time in my late twenties, and I consider the training and experiences I had in the military as a great balance to the Liberal Arts education I had received at UC Santa Barbara. Today I am a successful investment broker in San Francisco, a person better suited for a civilian career clearly. But there is no doubt that serving in the Army as a young woman helped my self confidence in a way that my formal education never did.

Every citizen should serve.

Anyone in the military, careerist or not, has a longer stretch as a civilian than as military. Seems to me all those years before and after have a big influence which puts a person pretty much in consonance with the general population.

It does, though, give them a different perspective as a citizen of the U.S. They don’t think of themselves as only a citizen of the world instead. They can’t see having the military, which is an arm of the political body, receiving its mission by referendum. So, they can bitch and holler, too, but they have accepted their duty. Be happy they do.

Monica,

“But there is no doubt that serving in the Army as a young woman helped my self confidence in a way that my formal education never did.

Every citizen should serve.”

…

Just because it helped you doesn’t mean that it will help any or even most people. You’re trying to back up an opinion with a personal experience that is by no means universal. Hence, universal conscription would be a bad thing…

“The Romans said it even better: Si vis pacem para bellum. If your goal is peace, prepare for war.”

Yeah, we really want to be more like the Romans… Actually, I don’t completely disagree with the quote, but it is a yin without a yang. I shall complete it for you: If your goal is peace, prepare for war, but in times of war, prepare for peace.

Monica, well put. I doubt most of the critical thinkers here ever served, from the comments zeek made I think he is one of them.
“Just because it helped you doesn’t mean it will help any or even most people” Won’t help ANY? huh?
And just because you have experienced both sides of the higher education vs military service doesn’t mean you have any clear insight into the matter. It obviously helped you, could anyone other than you know the answer to that?
I do disagree with you if you are suggesting the return of the draft, I’m not sure you are however. The draft pulls in too many people who don’t want to be there. If you fill the ranks with people who are being forced you will not have the quality of military we have with all volunteers. If you are in a combat situation, you want someone behind you who is there to cover you and not thinking how much he hates the current president or how he hates one political party or the other.

You are right. The draft does cause a lot of resentment mostly because it selects only certain people. What I thnk would really work is a universal conscription like the one Isreal has. All young people go in for a few years. Absolutely non selective, so nobody feels singled out. Most stay in just the required time and a few stay in and make it a lifetime career. A system like that would mean that every citizen would have some military training and it would do away with misunderstandings that a lot of civilians have about military life and military people. Even people who only serve a few years usually look back with pride at that time and consider it a worthwhile experience.

In a combat situation do you really think anybody’s worried about who’s in office?

Monica,
What I was referring to was the mindset while in the military in general. Soldiers have died because of some screwup who was not paying attention during training. I have always wanted someone behind me who was clear thinking and well trained.

JC,

I meant to say “all” not “any.” Sorry for the confusion, I wasn’t trying to make a sweeping generalization only pointing out that Monica was.

JC,

“I doubt most of the critical thinkers here ever served, from the comments zeek made I think he is one of them.”

What’s your point? Is there something wrong with being “critical?”

Zeek,
From listening to you, I find it unlikely that you have served in the military nor have you had any personal experience to base an opinion on if it would be helpful to any, some, most, or all people. I am not saying you should or should not have served, that isn’t my place to judge what you feel you want to do in life. I do however support young men and women who join the military.
Monica obviously learned a great deal while in the service and gives credit to the military for some of her personal growth. The way I understood her comment, she was very sold on the advantages the experience had given her and she thinks it would help every American to serve.
I guess what I’m saying, at the risk of sending you into orbit, is I don’t think anyone should be critical of something they have little or no personal experience in.

JC,

I am not saying you should or should not have served, that isn’t my place to judge what you feel you want to do in life.

Exactly, why should universal conscription take place then? You are essentially making the judgement that everyone will benefit from it therefore it is a good idea to force everyone to.

I do however support young men and women who join the military.

As do I, but that’s because they are making the choice of their own free will.

Monica obviously learned a great deal while in the service and gives credit to the military for some of her personal growth. The way I understood her comment, she was very sold on the advantages the experience had given her and she thinks it would help every American to serve.

More power to her, but this seems rather like a college student suggesting every American should go to college based on his/her experiences. It may very well be rewarding to go to college, but we most certainly don’t force everyone to take that step.

I guess what I’m saying, at the risk of sending you into orbit, is I don’t think anyone should be critical of something they have little or no personal experience in.

So what you’re suggesting is that instead I just lay down and take others’ word for it? Or at least, something to that effect. Perhaps the best way to learn about something is to experience it, but there are some things I don’t want to spend time on when I feel quite strongly that it would be a waste. Now, in regards to military service, I’m not saying that it will be a waste of time for many people, but I have determined it is not for me. If that isn’t good enough for you I’m afraid I’m not willing to enlist to prove my point.

Zeek,
I believe I said I was NOT in favor of a draft, I DID say that young people COULD learn by serving in the military and I stand by that comment. Again, so I am not misleading. I DO NOT suggest a draft. I do not believe everyone is suited for military service. I do believe that most people would benefit from some military service however. This being the case, we don’t force anyone to join the military. I thought we started out talkin abut ROTC on campus and now we’re squaring off on a draft that doesn’t exist. Nobody in this country is forced to join the military or attend a university. What confuses me is you sound as if you doubt the benefits of EITHER.
“The best way to learn about something is to experience it” I believe Monica has experienced both university and military life. I have experienced both as well. I can tell you from experience that BOTH were well worth the time spent. I do agree with you that I don’t think either is for everyone. You have every right to pick what you want to do in life, I agree with you 100%. That is exactly what this country is all about and that is why my son is serving today. If some people don’t think it isn’t for them I have no problem with that. I do dislike them trying to prevent recruiters from at least exposing students to the options they have available to them.

JC

I believe I said I was NOT in favor of a draft, I DID say that young people COULD learn by serving in the military and I stand by that comment.

Well I was responding to Monica’s statement on universal conscription, which, as I’m sure you know, is quite different from a draft.

Then entire point of me being critical was not about the military in general but universal conscription. I’m beginning to doubt you fully read my posts.